Zoos and aquariums tend to be a prickly subject among animal advocates. From captive animal welfare to the use of animals for human entertainment, there are many concerns that focus on whether zoos should continue to exist. Regardless of these criticisms, zoos are a very popular attraction for many, including tourists and families with young children.

For millions of people, the zoo continues to serve as the only way people living in urban environments can interact with non-domesticated, living animals. This leaves zoos in a unique position either to foster connections between humans and animals or, more pessimistically, to normalize the use of animals as objects for human entertainment and negatively impact animal welfare attitudes.

This study explored how differences within a zoo can change visitors’ perceptions of captive animals. Visitors at the Chicago Zoological Society’s Brookfield Zoo were surveyed during the summer of 2012 (N = 216) at one of three carnivore exhibits. These exhibits ranged from an older, smaller grotto-style lion exhibit that does not appear similar to a lion’s natural habitat, to a larger forested wolf exhibit that appears more natural but creates visibility issues as the animals have more places to hide away from view.

As predicted, visitors felt that the least natural exhibit was less suitable for its inhabitants than visitors at the more natural exhibit. Visitors to the lion exhibit were also significantly less likely to complete the entire survey, reinforcing prior research that has found guests will spend more time at a naturalistic zoo exhibit regardless of whether animals are even present.

Perceptions of higher exhibit suitability were also found to correlate with more positive emotions about the animals and a better experience at that exhibit. These positive feelings were, in turn, the strongest predictors of perceived importance of maintaining suitable habitats, as well as feelings of connection toward animals. These findings suggest that exhibition style influences how people experience the zoo. Habitats that effectively represent the needs of a species may help further the conservation goals of the zoo and its visitors.

Animal welfare concerns can also be partly alleviated if zoos focus their limited resources on larger, natural exhibits showcasing fewer species in highly-specialized environments. Bringing the “wild” to urbanites could have a dramatic effect on conservation efforts. This is particularly meaningful for the children who visit zoos each year. A memorable experience connecting with another species can inspire a new generation of animal advocates.

Zoo guests were also found to explore different areas of the zoo equally, regardless of their original motivation for visiting the zoo. This once again highlights the unique opportunity for large zoos to make an impact on their visitors. Even guests who arrived at the zoo for nothing more than an outing with their family will likely experience the more “difficult” natural exhibits and can benefit from any learning opportunities the zoo provides.

This can be a wonderful opportunity for zoos to draw people in with the allure of entertainment, and then curate their spaces to support their mission and shape visitors’ opinions. In the long-term, many animal advocates may want to abolish zoos. In the meantime, zoos can evolve to become better stewards of the animals in their care by providing more natural environments – and by focusing more on humane education.

[Contributed by Erin Behn]