Search

Complex socio-environmental challenges require interdisciplinary, team-based research capacity. Graduate students are fundamental to building such capacity, yet formal opportunities for graduate students to develop these capacities and skills are uncommon. This paper presents an assessment of the Graduate Pursuit (GP) program, a formal interdisciplinary team science graduate research and training program administered by the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC). Quantitative and qualitative assessment of the program’s first cohort revealed that participants became significantly more comfortable with interdisciplinary research and team science approaches, increased their capacity to work across disciplines, and were enabled to produce tangible research outcomes. Qualitative analysis of four themes—(1) discipline, specialization, and shared purpose, (2) interpersonal skills and personality, (3) communication and teamwork, and (4) perceived costs and benefits—encompass participants’ positive and negative experiences and support findings from past assessments. The findings also identify challenges and benefits related to individual personality traits and team personality orientation, the importance of perceiving a sense of autonomy and independence, and the benefit of graduate training programs independent of the university and graduate program environment.

The article responds to Birdsong et al.'s assertion that social identity theory (SIT) can explain group attitudes towards grizzly bears in Montana. It critiques Birdsong et al.'s lack of rigorous use of SIT in their research, highlighting weak theory application and inadequate operationalization of social identity (SI). The article emphasizes the importance of strong theory application, clear conceptualization, operationalization, and interpretation in theory-based research, urging researchers to adhere to these fundamentals. It concludes by stressing the need for empirical rigor and theoretical substantiation in conservation science research, calling for adherence to discipline-specific standards and theoretical structures. [Extracted from the article]

Knowledge of the relationships among psychological constructs such as values and motivations that influence proenvironmental behavior provides public land management agencies with guidance on how to minimize stakeholder impacts on the environment. A rich body of research has demonstrated that values form a tripartite structure underlying environmental concern, encompassing biospheric, egoistic, and altruistic values; however, recent work has suggested hedonic values are also an instrumental basis for environmental concern. Few studies have tested this proposition. We contend that hedonic values are instrumental in explaining the psychological processes that gird individual decisions, particularly in nature-based settings where stakeholder decisions are compelled by leisure pursuits. Our results indicate that place-based motivations, particularly escape from the pressures of everyday life, can help close the prominent value–action gap and explain why outdoor recreationists engage in minimum-impact activities specified in the U.S. Leave No Trace educational outreach program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effects of gender on involvement in high-risk recreation have received limited research attention despite mounting evidence suggesting the learned interactions between people and places likely vary for men and women. The purpose of this study was to provide insights into how gender influenced the motivation-involvement relationship among whitewater recreationists on a Wild and Scenic River in California. Our results revealed the motivations of Risk, Escape, Learning, and Achievement/Stimulation positively influenced involvement in rafting activities. Although gender did not influence all dimensions of involvement, we found that identity expression varied between subgroups. Specifically, men were more likely to ascribe meaning to rafting than women because this activity allowed them to affirm and express their individual character. The implications emanating from this study advance theoretical understanding of the factors that influence enduring involvement and inform natural resource management decisions about maintaining the desired benefits of activities sought by nature-based recreationists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Raptors are affected by interactions with humans, primarily in the form of persecution and habitat disturbance. Here, we quantify and characterize empirical literature on human–raptor interactions, inclusive of sociocultural, ecological, natural history, and conservation perspectives. We focus on species, geography, and human-caused mortality to understand the scope of research and directions for future raptor conservation research. Although raptor conservation is intrinsically the study of human behavior and social systems, we found ecological research that focuses on the effects humans have on raptors encompasses the majority of human–raptor interaction research. We stress the need to focus on the causes of human–raptor interactions and suggest that the combination of social, ecological, and management-relevant approaches is best to examine problems and identify solutions. Global raptor conservation relies on humans to establish and improve interaction and coexistence. Human–wildlife interaction research is well-established, but tends to focus on large-bodied, terrestrial mammals. The scope and characteristics of research that explores human–raptor interactions are relatively unknown. As an initial step toward quantifying and characterizing the state of applied, cross-disciplinary literature on human–raptor interactions, we use established systematic map (scoping reviews) protocols to catalog literature and describe trends, identify gaps and biases, and critically reflect on the scope of research. We focus on the peer-reviewed (refereed) literature germane to human–raptor interaction, conflict, tolerance, acceptance, persecution and coexistence. Based on 383 papers retrieved that fit our criteria, we identified trends, biases, and gaps. These include a majority of research taking place within North America and Europe; disproportionately few interdisciplinary and social research studies; interactions focused on indirect anthropogenic mortality; and vague calls for human behavior changes, with few concrete steps suggested, when management objectives are discussed. Overall, we note a predominant focus on the study of ecological effects from human–raptor interactions rather than sociocultural causes, and suggest (as others have in various conservation contexts) the imperative of human behavioral, cultural, and political inquiry to conserve raptor species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]