Due to a dramatic increase in commercial fishing in the last 50 years, 75% of all sharks and rays are at risk of extinction. As sharks are key species in marine ecosystems, their removal has significant effects, including overall decreases in ocean biodiversity and other fish species. This study suggests that the public perception of sharks plays a role in this decline and prevents their effective conservation. In it, the researchers review recent peer-reviewed studies on the perception of sharks in media, schools, policy management and more, outlining some common themes that emerge. Following this, the researchers suggest some practical steps that could change the perception of sharks to be more positive.

Through their review of the literature, the authors found that the media is a key driver of attitudes towards sharks. One example is the rise in negative attitudes towards sharks after the popularity of the 1975 movie Jaws. More recent studies have examined Brazilian media, Australian newspapers, and Australian social media outlets, finding that sharks are generally shown in a very negative and violent light by popular media. 

This phenomenon affects shark conservation efforts. The researchers point to a study which analyzed Australian political speeches, finding that they aligned with media narratives about sharks rather than scientific evidence. However, politicians may feel the pressure of media narratives more than the public. For example, multiple studies in the review showed that the public prefers more peaceful and non-lethal responses to shark attacks than political leaders do.

Drawing on studies with a wide variety of sources, from interviews to content analysis to newspapers to analysis of children’s drawings, the researchers noted that greater knowledge about sharks is generally connected to more pro-shark attitudes. Some studies suggested that learning about sharks as children encourages greater criticism of how sharks are negatively depicted in the media. Studies that looked at water sport-related magazines or Discovery Channel’s Shark Week found that these outlets increasingly emphasized scientific and pro-conservation content, although some negative images of sharks still showed up. 

Unfortunately, not all knowledge about sharks benefits their conservation. The researchers argue that sharks are often perceived as masculine. In stereotypical accounts of gender, men are depicted as more active and action-oriented, while women are seen as more dependent and passive. For this reason, the researchers argued that pro-shark messages that emphasized the non-dangerous nature of sharks may backfire, as they encourage associations of sharks with attacks and aggression actions. One study found that aquarium goers did not report less fear of sharks after being exposed to messages about the small percentage of shark species that bite humans. However, aquarium goers who were exposed to messages about sharks’ lack of desire to harm humans and their social networks reported less fear. Drawing on this result, the researchers suggested that emphasizing the personalities and social nature of sharks can avoid gendered stereotypes about sharks as aggressive, masculine predators.

One limitation of this review is that it’s not clear how the researchers decided which studies to include. As the authors mention, attitudes towards sharks and shark conservation is a growing area of research with many recently published works. Often, literature reviews will set limits on which studies were reviewed — for example, all studies with the keyword “shark” from 2020-2022 — and describe key insights from that pool. Otherwise, scholars run the risk of emphasizing studies that align with their own views while downplaying those that don’t. For example, this particular review argues that not much work has been done on shark stereotypes except the previous work of the lead author, ignoring other work on shark stereotypes that does exist. This isn’t to say that these researchers don’t offer important insights — but it’s important for readers to keep in mind that this method can’t perfectly eliminate bias.

Animal advocates can be encouraged by this review’s collection of literature showing that attitudes towards sharks can be changed through education and specific communication tactics. Although negative depictions of sharks can seem deeply embedded in popular culture, the authors remind us that other animals like whales and dolphins have been able to overcome similar negative stereotypes over time. Indeed, some of the studies described suggest that attitudes towards sharks are already changing in popular media and among beachgoers, even if this is not reflected in public policy yet. This indicates that shark conservation is an area with significant potential for growth, as current shark risk management policies are unpopular with the public. 

Finally, advocates can take away an important lesson in how traditional ideas about gender may interfere with perceptions of sharks. Rather than emphasizing the low rate of shark attacks, which still associates sharks with tropes of aggression and attacks, it may be more productive to emphasize the social networks and individual personalities that sharks have.