Effects of relational and instrumental messaging on human perception of rattlesnakes

Allison, Erin1 ; Taylor, Emily2 ; Graham, Zack1 ; Amarello, Melissa3 ; Smith, Jeffrey3 ; Loughman, Zachary1

Published Mar 19, 2024 on Dryad. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.j3tx95xnb

Cite this dataset

Allison, Erin et al. (2024). Effects of relational and instrumental messaging on human perception of rattlesnakes [Dataset]. Dryad. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.j3tx95xnb

Abstract

We tested the effects of relational and instrumental message strategies on US residents’ perception of rattlesnakes—animals that tend to generate feelings of fear, disgust, or hatred but are nevertheless key members of healthy ecosystems. We deployed an online survey to social media users (n=1,182) to describe perceptions of rattlesnakes and assess the change after viewing a randomly selected relational or instrumental video message. An 8–item, pre– and post– Rattlesnake Perception Test (RPT) evaluated perception variables along emotional, knowledge, and behavioral gradients on a 5–point Likert scale; the eight responses were combined to produce an Aggregate Rattlesnake Perception (ARP) score for each participant. We found that people from Abrahamic religions (i.e., Christianity, Judaism, Islam) and those identifying as female were associated with low initial perceptions of rattlesnakes, whereas agnostics and individuals residing in the Midwest region and in rural residential areas had relatively favorable perceptions. Overall, both videos produced positive changes in rattlesnake perception, although the instrumental video message led to a greater increase in ARP than the relational message. The relational message was associated with significant increases in ARP only among females, agnostics, Baby Boomers (age 57–75), and Generation–Z (age 18–25 to exclude minors). The instrumental video message was associated with significant increases in ARP, and this result varied by religious group. ARP changed less in those reporting prior experience with a venomous snake bite (to them, a friend, or a pet) than in those with no such experience. Our data suggest that relational and instrumental message strategies can improve people’s perceptions of unpopular and potentially dangerous wildlife, but their effectiveness may vary by gender, age, religious beliefs, and experience. These results can be used to hone and personalize communication strategies to improve perceptions of unpopular wildlife species.

README

This README file was generated on 2024-03-18 by Zackary Graham.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Title of Dataset: Effects of relational and instrumental messaging on human perception of rattlesnakes
Author Information
A. Principal Investigator Contact Information
Name: Zackary J. Loughman
Institution: West Liberty University
Address: West Liberty, WV, USA
Email: zloughman@westliberty.edu
Date of data collection (single date, range, approximate date): 2020-2022
Geographic location of data collection: Online Survey
Information about funding sources that supported the collection of the data: Herpteological Society
SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION
Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain
Links to publications that cite or use the data:
Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: None
Links/relationships to ancillary data sets: None
Was data derived from another source? No
A. If yes, list source(s): NA

DATA & FILE OVERVIEW

File List:

A) Rattlesnake_perception_data1
B) Rattlesnake_perception_data2
C) Rattlesnake_perception_data3
D) Rattlesnake_perception_data4
E) Rattlesnake_perception_data5

Relationship between files, if important: None
Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: None
Are there multiple versions of the dataset? No
A. If yes, name of file(s) that was updated: NA
i. Why was the file updated? NA
ii. When was the file updated? NA

#########################################################################

DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Rattlesnake_perception_data1

Number of variables: 28
Number of cases/rows: 1354
Variable List:

* id: unique identifier for each participant

* q1.pre-q8.pre: score on question rattlesnake pereception survey questions (1-8) before video treatment.

* local.rattlesnakes: score for whether rattlesnakes are local to the participants area (0 = no, 1 = yes, 2 = i dont know)

* wild.encounter: score for whether rattlesnakes have ever been enountered by the particiapnt in the wild (0 = no, 1 = yes, 2 = i dont know)

* captive.encounter: score for whether rattlesnakes have ever been enountered by the particiapnt in captivity (0 = no, 1 = yes, 2 = i dont know)

* snake.bite: score for whether particiapnt has ever been bitten by a snake (0 = no, 1 = yes, 2 = i dont know)

* bite.combine: combined variable that determines whether a partiicapnt or someone a particiapnt knows has been bitten by a rattlesnake (1 = no, 2 = yes)

* bite.victim: variable that indicates who was bitten by a rattlesnake (f = friend, p = pet, y = yourself, n/a = not applicable)

* bite.pet.yourself: variable that indiicates if the particiaptn has been bitten by a rattelsnake (yes = yes, no = no).

* treatment: variable that what treatment video that particiapnt has recieved (e = relational, s = instrumental)

* q1.post-q8.post: score on question rattlesnake pereception survey questions (1-8) after video treatment.

* total.pre: total score for question 1-8 before rattlesnake survey

* total.post: total score for question 1-8 after rattlesnake survey

* diff: difference in score calculating from subtracting total.pre from total.post

Missing data codes: None
Specialized formats or other abbreviations used: None

#########################################################################

DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: Rattlesnake_perception_data2

Number of variables: 28
Number of cases/rows: 713
Variable List: