This study demonstrates that faces of spiders that are neotenic are perceived as less scary than others, if not cute. A convenience sample of adults (n=69) at a university distributed 15 photographs spider faces along a ruler based on perceived scariness. Six of the seven photographs of jumping spiders (Family Salticidae) were ranked as least scary. Results suggest that using illustrations of jumping spiders to create a positive affective first impression in interpretive programs about spiders is a reasonable assumption. Spiders in the jumping spider family may be viewed as a –gateway spider.” This study illustrates a research and design approach termed Program Component Analysis (PCA), in which a design question for only a component of a program is subjected to systematic analysis.
AueT, & HoeppliM. (2011). Evidence for encounter expectancy bias in fear of spiders.Cognition and Emotion, 26 (4), 727–736. DOI: 10.1080/02699931.2011.60224
2.
BaileyH. D., ArmstrongB. K., de KlerkN. H., FritschiL., AttiaJ., ScottR. J., SmibertE., & MilneE. (2011). Exposure to professional pest control treatments and the risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia, International Journal of Cancer, 129, 1678–1688. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.25769
3.
BattS., (2009). Human attitudes towards animals in relation to species similarity to humans: A multivariate approach.Bioscience Horizons, 2 [June]: 180–190.
4.
Biesta, (2007). Why “what works” won't work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research.Educational Theory, 7 (1), 1–22.
5.
BorgiM., & CirulliF. (2013). Children's preferences for infantile features in cats and dogs.Human-Animal Interactions Bulletin, 1 (2), 1–15.
6.
BradleyR. A. (2013). Common spiders of North America.Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
BrochuL., & MerrimanT. (2008). Personal interpretation: Connecting your audience to heritage resources.Fort Collins: InterpPress.
8.
CunninghamM. R., RobertsA. R., BarbeeA. P., DruenP. B., and VuC. (1995). –Their ideas of beauty are, on the whole, the same as ours”: Consistency and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female physical attractiveness.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 261–269.
9.
DigirolamoG. J., & HintzmanD. L. (1997). First impressions are lasting impressions: A primacy effect in memory for repetitions, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4 (1), 121–124.
10.
DoveJ. E. (1998). Students’ alternative conceptions in Earth science: A review of research and implications for teaching and learning.Research Papers in Education, 13 (2), 183–201.
11.
DoveJ. E., EverettL. A., & PreeceP. F. W. (2000). The urban child's conception of a river.Education, 3–13: Internationa Journal of Primary, Elementary, and Early Years Education, 28 (2), 52–56.
12.
DriverR. (1981). Pupil's alternative frameworks in science.European Journal of Science Education, 3 (1), 93–101.
13.
EstrenM. J. (2012). The neoteny barrier: seeking respect for the non-cute.Journal of Animal Ethics, 2, 6–11.
14.
GenoskoG. (2005). Natures and cultures of cuteness.Invisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Culture, 1–19. http://hdl.handle.net/1802/3753
15.
GillathO., BahnsA. J., GeF., CrandallC. S., (2012). Shoes as a source of first impressions.Journal of Research in Personality, 46 (4), 423–430.
16.
GouldS. J. (1979). Mickey Mouse meets Konrad Lorenz.Natural History, 88(May) 30–36.
17.
Gomez-ZwiepS. (2008). Elementary teachers’ understanding of students’ science misconceptions: Implications for practice and teacher education.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19 (5), 437–454.
18.
GravesP. (2013). Consumer.ology: The truth about consumers and the psychology of shopping.London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
19.
HarrisM. J., & GarrisC. P. (2008). You never get a second chance to make a first impression: Behavioral consequences of first impressions. In AmbadyN., & SkowronskiJ. J. (Eds.), First impressions (pp. 147–170). New York: Guilford Press.
20.
Immordino-YangM. H., & FaethM. (2010). The role of emotion and skilled intuition in learning. In SousaD. A. (Ed.), Mind, brain and education: Implications for the classroom (pp. 73–137). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
21.
KahnemanD. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow.New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
22.
KellertS. R. (1993). Values and perceptions of invertebrates.Conservation Biology, 7, 845–855.
23.
KnightA.J. (2008). –Bats, snakes and spiders. Oh my!” How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection.Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28 (1), 94–103.
24.
LaneR. (2008). Students’ alternative conceptions in geography.Geographical Education, 21, 43–52.
25.
MageeW.J., WilliamW., EatonW.W., WittchenH., McGonagleK.A., KesslerR.C. (1996). Agoraphobia, simple phobia, and social phobia in the national co-morbidity survey.JAMA Psychiatry, 53 (2), 159–168.
26.
MatchettG., and DaveyG.C.L. (1991). A test of a disease-avoidance model of animal phobias.Behaviour Research and Therapy, 29, 91–94.
27.
MerckelbachH., De longP., MurisP., and Van den HoutM.A. (1996). The etiology of specific phobias: A review.Clinical Psychology Review, 14, 337–361.
28.
MillerJ. K., WestermanD. L., & LloydM. E. (2004). Are first impressions lasting impressions? An exploration of the generality effect in memory for repetitions.Memory and Cognition, 32 (8), 1305–1315.
29.
NarayanS., LiewZ., PaulK., LeeP, SinsheimerJ. S., BronsteinJ. M., & RitzB. (2013). Household organophosphorus pesticide use and Parkinson's disease.International Journal of Epidemiology, 42, 1476–1485.
30.
PooleyJ. A., & O'ConnorM. (2000). Environmental education and attitudes: Emotions and beliefs are what is needed.Environment and Behavior, 32, 711–723.
31.
RosenzweigP. (2014). The halo effect and the eight other business delusions that deceive managers.New York: Free Press.
32.
Gomez-ZwiepS. (2008). Elementary teachers’ understanding of students’ science misconceptions: Implications for practice and teacher education.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19 (5), 437–454.
33.
SengeP. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.New York: Doubleday.
34.
StanovichK. E. (2010). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought.New Haven: Yale University Press.
35.
StokesD. L. (2007). Things we like: Human preferences among similar organisms and implications for conservation.Human Ecology, 35, 361–369.
36.
TildenF. (1977). Interpreting our heritage.Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.
37.
UlrichR.S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscape. In KellertS. R., & WilsonE. O., (Eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis (73–137). Washington DC: Island Press.
38.
VaseyM. W., VilenskyM. R., HeathJ. H., HarbaughC. N., BuffingtonA. G., & FazioR. H. (2012). It was as big as my head, I swear! Biased spider size estimation in spider phobia.Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 26, 20–24.
39.
VelascoC., KingsR., JonesS., SpenceC. (2013). The sound of temperature: What information do pouring sounds convey concerning the temperature of a beverage.Journal of Sensory Studies, 28 (5), 335–345.
