Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Cognitive biases can play a role in extinction assessments: The case of the Caspian tiger

Özgün Emre Can, Neil D’Cruze, Neil D’Cruze

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · 2023

doi:10.3389/fevo.2022.1050191 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

The premature declaration of a species as extinct has been reported across different taxonomic groups and is commonly referred to as Romeo’s error or the Lazarus effect. In this study, based on a review of historical records and testimonies from local communities, we review the case of Caspian tiger (Panthera tigris virgata), a species we consider was prematurely declared globally extinct in 1950s. Considering that compelling evidence which suggests that Caspian tigers existed in Turkey perhaps up until early 1990s (some 40 years after international scientific community considered the species extinct) it is reasonable to posit that conservationists missed a historical opportunity to save the species. The case of the Caspian tiger demonstrates the cognitive bias of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action and the potential implications for conservation experts who are engaged in remotely evaluating contemporary species distributions. To mitigate these factors when assessing the global status of species threatened by extinction, we suggest that increased awareness of this type of cognitive bias could facilitate the introduction of additional measures in relevant conservation initiatives and in IUCN Red List assessments. For example, the formation of independent and specific teams to unearth implicit assumptions and weaknesses in assessments, and to question the group thinking of the species assessors. Against the backdrop of the current unprecedented rapid biodiversity decline, we recommend that researchers should be alert of the cognitive biases involved in species assessments and in conservation at large.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.