LEARNING BY WATCHING
Part 2 of 3 — “Not a Pet” Series

What can the science of learning tell us about the messages people may take away from wildlife presentations?

In Part 1 of this series, we asked a simple question:
ㅤ
If zoos tell visitors that wild animals are “Not a Pet,” but also present some of those animals as ambassadors in close proximity to people, could the message visitors hear and the experience they see leave different impressions?
ㅤ
Part 2 turns to the scientific literature for guidance.
ㅤ
For decades, research in psychology, education and cognitive science has demonstrated that people do not learn only through words. They also learn by observing others, interpreting social cues and connecting information with experience.
ㅤ
That distinction is worth considering when examining how wildlife is presented to zoo audiences.

OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING

Psychologist Albert Bandura's influential work demonstrated that people can learn by observing the behavior of others and the consequences associated with those behaviors. Individuals do not necessarily need to perform an action themselves to learn something from seeing it modeled.
ㅤ
This does not establish that watching a zoo professional handle a wild animal causes visitors to want that animal as a pet.
ㅤ
But it provides a reason to ask whether what visitors observe during an educational presentation can become part of what they learn from it.
ㅤ
When visitors see wild animals calmly handled, carried, positioned near people or walked on leashes by experienced professionals, the visual experience exists alongside whatever verbal message accompanies it.

SOCIAL LEARNING AND MODELING

Learning also takes place within a social context. People observe others, interpret their behavior and use those observations to help form expectations about the world around them.
ㅤ
The person delivering a wildlife presentation is not simply speaking. That person is also demonstrating a particular relationship between humans and a wild animal.
ㅤ
An educator may explain that wild animals should never be treated as pets.
ㅤ
At the same time, a close-contact presentation may visually show an animal appearing calm, approachable or accustomed to human handling.
ㅤ
The scientific question is not whether visitors consciously reject the spoken message.
ㅤ
It is whether the visual demonstration may also contribute to the impression they take away.

ANTHROPOMORPHISM

Humans commonly interpret animals through familiar human emotions, motivations and social relationships—a tendency generally described as anthropomorphism.
ㅤ
Anthropomorphism is complex and is not inherently harmful. In some circumstances, perceiving similarities between humans and other animals may encourage empathy or concern for them.
ㅤ
But it can also lead people to interpret animal behavior through a human-centered lens rather than through the biology and natural behavior of the species itself.
ㅤ
That makes the context in which an animal is presented important.
ㅤ
Does the experience primarily help audiences understand the animal as a wild species with its own behavioral, ecological and social needs?
ㅤ
Or might aspects of the presentation encourage audiences to interpret the animal through a more familiar human-animal relationship?

WHAT DO PEOPLE REMEMBER?

Learning is influenced by far more than the information contained in a sign or spoken presentation. Attention, prior knowledge, social context and the experience surrounding information can all affect what people notice and remember.
ㅤ
For a zoo visitor, a close encounter with a wild animal may be one of the most distinctive experiences of the day.
ㅤ
It may be:
ㅤ
• a sloth being carried before an audience…
• a serval walking on a leash…
• a macaw perched on someone's arm…
• or a wild animal calmly positioned beside a trainer.
ㅤ
Those moments may coexist with important information about conservation, animal behavior and why wild animals should not be kept as pets.
ㅤ
The question is whether the different elements of that experience reinforce one another—or potentially compete for the visitor's attention and interpretation.

INTENTION IS NOT THE SAME AS OUTCOME

An institution may intend for an ambassador animal to inspire conservation concern, teach biological information or demonstrate why the species is unsuitable as a pet.
ㅤ
Those are educational intentions.
ㅤ
But determining educational effectiveness requires another question:
ㅤ
What did the audience actually learn?
ㅤ
Did visitors better understand the animal's natural behavior and ecological role?
ㅤ
Did they understand why the species is unsuitable for private ownership?
ㅤ
Did attitudes toward wildlife or conservation change?
ㅤ
And, importantly, did the presentation unintentionally communicate anything different from the intended message?
ㅤ
These are questions that require evidence rather than assumption.

THE BOTTOM LINE

The scientific literature discussed here does not demonstrate that ambassador-animal programs cause people to purchase exotic pets.
ㅤ
Nor does it establish that every close-contact wildlife presentation is educationally ineffective.
ㅤ
What the broader science of learning does demonstrate is that people can learn from more than spoken or written information. Observation, context and modeled behavior can also contribute to learning.
ㅤ
That makes educational consistency a legitimate question for organizations committed to discouraging the exotic-pet trade.
ㅤ
If wild animals truly are “Not a Pet,” then perhaps the effectiveness of wildlife education should be evaluated not only by what educators say, but also by what audiences see, understand and ultimately remember.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE REFERENCED

Albert Bandura — Social Learning Theory (1977)
ㅤ
Albert Bandura — Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory (1986)
ㅤ
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine — How People Learn II: Learners, Contexts, and Cultures (2018)

​

EXPLORE THE COMPLETE “NOT A PET” SERIES:

​

Part 1 — Not a Pet…Until It's Part of the Show?
Examining whether educational messages and educational experiences always tell the same story.
ㅤ
Part 3 — Education That Inspires Respect Without Sending Mixed Messages
What might wildlife education look like when the experience consistently reinforces the message?

​

KeepingWildlifeWild.orgㅤ
Evidence • Education • Accountability

​

How You Can Help:

Awareness is the first step toward meaningful change. Help advance evidence-based education, transparency and accountability by sharing this article with others.

Together, we can encourage a more informed conversation about the treatment and protection of wildlife