ICONIC MANAKINS AND DESPICABLE GRACKLES: COMPARING BIRD-RELATED CULTURAL ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ACROSS BIRDWATCHERS, FARMERS, AND URBANITES IN NORTHWESTERN COSTA RICA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite the great cultural and economic benefits associated with birdwatching and other bird-related cultural ecosystem services (CES), little is known about the bird-related CES perceived by people, and how they differ across stakeholder groups and species. The goal of this study was to explore CES across three stakeholder groups in northwestern Costa Rica. We conducted surveys (n=404 total) in which we presented farmers (n=140), urbanites (n=149), and birdwatchers (n=115) with pictures and songs of bird species and collected participants’ ratings on items designed to measure multiple CES. We found bird-related CES were perceived as six different constructs: identity, bequest, education, birdwatching, acoustic aesthetic, and disservices. The three stakeholder groups varied across these constructs and across species. Specifically, birdwatchers ranked species higher in terms of their education scores and lower in disservices scores compared to the other two groups. Positive correlations across CES, and negative correlations with disservices, suggest that the affect heuristic (by which generalized positive or negative feelings sway judgements of risks and benefits) might be informing bird-related CES. Our approach represents a novel method for assessing CES that can be adapted and modified for different taxa and multiple geographical contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".