4.1 Article

Motivations to participate in hunting and angling: a comparison among preferred activities and state of residence

期刊

HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE
卷 26, 期 6, 页码 576-595

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10871209.2020.1858208

关键词

Hunter and angler recruitment; natural resource agencies; factor analysis; R3 programs; motivations

资金

  1. Nebraska Game and Parks Commission [W-123-R]
  2. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [W-123-R]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research indicates that motivations for hunting and fishing go beyond harvesting game to include social, psychological, emotional, and physical benefits. Analysis of web-based questionnaire data in the central United States suggests that there may be a greater universality in these motivation factors among different activity types and locations, with negligible differences across states.
Motivations for hunting and fishing extend beyond harvesting game and include social, psychological, emotional, and physical benefits. We used data from a web-based questionnaire to compare relationships between preferred hunting or fishing activity types, state of residence, and motivations of hunters and anglers across the central United States (U.S.). Exploratory factor analysis yielded four motivation factors: nature, social, food, and challenge. Differences in terms of state were negligible across all motivation factors (eta(2)(p) < .01), indicating similarity across states. Nature (eta(2)(p) = :01) and social (eta(2)(p) < .01) factors were the first and second most important factors across activity types. We observed larger differences among the challenge (eta(2)(p) = .03), and food (eta(2)(p) = .15) factors, primarily driven by big game hunters. Big game hunters rated the food motivation factor greater than the other activity types. Overall, our results indicate that there might be a greater universality in these motivation factors among activity types and locations in the U.S.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据