Do People Care about the Origin of Wildlife? The Role of Social Stereotypes on Public Preference for Exotic Animals.

Abstract

Simple SummaryMany species have been introduced to regions outside their original habitat range. These non-native species are of great concern to conservation biologists, because they are considered to be dangerous to native species and ecosystems. However, the general public does not always agree with this appreciation and therefore conflicts are generated when trying to manage non-native species. This is one reason as to why it is important to understand the human dimension of this problem. We asked a group of college students about their favorite free-living animals and found that most preferred non-native species. To explain this result, we applied the theory of social animal stereotypes.People’s attitudes to animals are becoming increasingly important for the success of invasive species management. We asked college students from Argentina to fill a questionnaire that included a question about their favorite free-living animal. A total of 159 responses were obtained. Native species were significantly less preferred than non-native species. We tested if these preferences were associated with animal stereotypes. The stereotype hypothesis predicts that animals from the contemptible stereotype (invertebrate, rodents, and reptiles) should be the least preferred taxa, and animals from the protective stereotype (pets, horses, and primates) should be the most preferred taxa; animals from the subordination (lagomorphs and birds) and threatening–awe stereotype (large carnivores) should show intermediate preferences. The first prediction was supported. However, students showed significant preference for non-native taxa included in the threatening–awe stereotype. We proposed that people prefer large carnivores (stereotypically strong, intelligent, and beautiful animals) when they are exotic, because they did not represent a risk.