“Let Me Take a Selfie”: Implications of Social Media for Public Perceptions of Wild Animals
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Social media is a powerful tool for sharing information and awareness campaigns concerning environmental issues, especially as they pertain to the conservation of wild, nonhuman animals (henceforth, “animals”). This form of online engagement is a double-edged sword, however, since it can facilitate the legal and illegal trade of wild species, and promote harmful tourism encounters with wild animals. This review spans multiple disciplines and presents some key literature to date examining how public perceptions of wild animals are influenced by social media. This includes discussions of “viral” videos, “wildlife selfies,” changing trends in animal encounters at wildlife tourism destinations, and the influence of social media on the wildlife trade. Avenues for future research are suggested with urgency; the adverse effects of social media are understudied, yet bear serious consequences for the individual welfare and species conservation of wild animals.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it