We hypothesized that individuals with knowledge of zoological accreditation and its conservation role will have a positive outlook on these institutions.​ Our results from this study indicate that individuals with underlying views of nature play a meaningful role in shaping their perceptions of zoos and their role in conservation (Table 1). Respondents who expressed a strong appreciation for nature as an interconnected system were more likely to trust accredited zoos and recognize the educational components (Table 3). These results work alongside our hypothesis, as well as Kellert's framework, which suggests that humanistic value orientations, those who experience curiosity and connection towards wildlife (Kellert, 1980), can also be associated with positive attitudes towards zoos. Prior research has shown that zoo experiences can promote increased connectedness with nature and enhance attitudes (Bruni et al., 2008), further supporting the consistency of our findings.

 

Similarly, respondents with strong concern for animals, those holding moralistic value orientations (Kellert, 1980), were focused on the educational features and animal enrichment within the zoo (Table 4). In contrast, respondents with a fixation on certain animals were less likely to notice animal enrichment, suggesting that specific value orientations can influence what stands out during a zoo visit. ​

 

Additionally, we also hypothesized that people with previous exposure to zoos will have a positive outlook on the institutions compared to those who have less access to these facilities. Prior research suggests that environmental context can meaningfully shape perceptions of wildlife-related activities (Wilkins et al., 2019). For example, intentions to participate in hunting vary along the urban-rural gradient, with rural residents expressing more positive attitudes than urban residents (Wilkins et al., 2019). However, our results did not support this hypothesis. Attitudes did not vary statistical significance across respondents urban, suburban, or rural backgrounds, despite assumptions that exposure would differ by geographic context. This indicated that within our sample, place of origin was not a strong predictor of perceptions of zoos, suggesting that other factors, such as, personal values, prior experiences, or knowledge of accreditation that may play a more influential role.​

 

Our results support the first half of our hypothesis concerning accreditation knowledge and nature value orientations, but suggests that the second half, of exposure based on geographic access to zoos may play a smaller role than expected. These findings underscore the importance of transparent accreditation standards, educational communication, and visible enrichment practices in fostering public trust and enhancing visitor experience. As zoos continue to navigate ethical expectations and conservation responsibilities, understanding how different audiences respond to these institutions can inform more effective strategies to strengthen the relationship between the public and zoological facilities.