Estimating effects of adult male mortality on grizzly bear population growth and persistence using matrix models

We radio monitored a hunted, sexually segregated grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population and an unhunted, unsegregated population for demographics and constructed a stage- and age-classified matrix model to test for the effects of adult male mortality and resulting sexual segregation on population growth and persistence. Population parameters in the model were adult female survival, subadult female survival, offspring survival, probability of litter sizes, and probability of unsuccessful pregnancy. The last three parameters were affected by adult male mortality and segregation, the others were not. We compared population growth with and without effects of hunting by holding adult female and subadult female survival constant and by using hunted and unhunted values for offspring survival, litter size, and pregnancy. Population growth (Lambda) showed the greatest elasticity for adult survival, subadult survival, offspring survival, litter size, and unsuccessful pregnancy, in that order. This corresponds with observed anti-infanticide tactics (sexual segregation) by adult females to maximize their fitness. The hunted population decreased at a rate of 0.99 whereas the simulated, unhunted population increased at a rate of 1.05. The hunted population was much more susceptible to population extinction. Under demographic stochasticity mean time to extinction was 32 years in the hunted population and 110 years in the unhunted population. Under environmental stochasicity mean time to extinction was 21 years in the hunted population and 43 years in the unhunted population. We suggest that sexual segregation caused by hunting resident adult males can result in population decline and can even contribute to rapid population extinctions when numbers are small

Conservation targets for viable species assemblages in Canada: are percentage targets appropriate?

Percentage targets for conservation have become a popular tool (advocated in both the scientific literature and the conservation community) for setting minimum goals for the amount of land to be set aside as protected areas. However, there is little literature to support a consistent percentage target that might be widely applied. Moreover, most percentage targets have not taken into account issues of species persistence. A recent study of herbivores in Kruger National Park took into account issues of representation and persistence in setting conservation targets and found that results were consistently about 50% and were unaffected by different permutations of the reserve selection process. Here, we carry out a similar analysis for representation of mammals within sites that are predicted to allow for their persistence, across eight ecologically defined regions in Canada to test whether we see similar consistent patterns emerging. We found that percentage targets varied with the different permutations of the reserve selection algorithms, both within and between the study regions. Thus, we conclude that the use of percentage targets is not an appropriate conservation strategy

A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world. Protocol registration: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 12 May 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4878591.v1 © 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited

Author Correction: A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic

Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01173-x, published online 2 August 2021. In the version of this article initially published, the following authors were omitted from the author list and the Author contributions section for “investigation” and “writing and editing”: Nandor Hajdu (Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary), Jordane Boudesseul (Facultad de Psicología, Instituto de Investigación Científica, Universidad de Lima, Lima, Perú), Rafał Muda (Faculty of Economics, Maria Curie-Sklodowska University, Lublin, Poland) and Sandersan Onie (Black Dog Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia & Emotional Health for All Foundation, Jakarta, Indonesia). In addition, Saeideh FatahModares’ name was originally misspelled as Saiedeh FatahModarres in the author list. Further, affiliations have been corrected for Maria Terskova (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia), Susana Ruiz Fernandez (FOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen; Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, Tübingen, and LEAD Research Network, Eberhard Karls University, Tübingen, Germany), Hendrik Godbersen (FOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen, Germany), Gulnaz Anjum (Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada, and Department of Economics & Social Sciences, Institute of Business Administration, Karachi, Pakistan). The changes have been made to the HTML and PDF versions of the article

In COVID-19 health messaging, loss framing increases anxiety with Little-to-No concomitant benefits: Experimental evidence from 84 countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., “If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others”) or potential gains (e.g., “If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others”)? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions