Studies evaluating human-wildlife interactions (HWI) in a conservation context often include psychometric scales to measure attitudes and tolerance towards wildlife. However, data quality is at risk when such scales are used without appropriate validation or reliability testing, potentially leading to erroneous interpretation or application of findings. Two online databases (ProQuest Psych Info and Web of Science), were used to identify published HWI studies including attitude and tolerance which we subsequently analyzed to; (1) determine the methods used to measure attitudes or tolerance toward predators and other wildlife; (2) determine the proportion of these methods utilizing psychometric scales; and (3) evaluate the rigor with which the scales were used by examining whether the psychometric properties of validity and reliability were reported. For the decade spanning 2007-2017, 114 published studies were identified; 94 (82%) used questionnaires and many of these (53; 56%) utilized a psychometric scale. Most scales (39; 74%) had at least one test of reliability reported, but reliance on a single test was notable, contrary to recommended practice. A smaller majority (35; 66%) reported a test of validity but this was primarily restricted to structural validity rather than more comprehensive testing. Encouragingly, HWI-investigators are increasingly utilizing the necessary psychometric tools for designing and analyzing questionnaire data, but the failure to assess the validity or reliability of psychometric scales used in over one third of published HWI attitude research warrants attention. Incorporation of more robust application of psychometric scales is advocated in order to advance understanding of stakeholder attitudes as they relate to HWI. Article impact statement: Understanding attitudes toward wildlife in human-wildlife interaction research requires robust application of social science methods. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

中文翻译：

---

评估在人类与野生动物互动研究中使用心理测量量表来确定对野生动物的态度和容忍度

在保护环境中评估人类与野生动物互动 (HWI) 的研究通常包括心理测量量表，以衡量对野生动物的态度和容忍度。然而，如果在没有适当验证或可靠性测试的情况下使用此类量表，数据质量就会受到威胁，这可能会导致对结果的错误解释或应用。两个在线数据库（ProQuest Psych Info 和 Web of Science）用于识别已发表的 HWI 研究，包括我们随后对其进行分析的态度和容忍度；(1) 确定用于衡量对捕食者和其他野生动物的态度或容忍度的方法；(2) 利用心理测量量表确定这些方法的比例；(3) 通过检查是否报告了效度和信度的心理测量特性来评估量表使用的严谨性。在 2007 年至 2017 年的十年间，确定了 114 项已发表的研究；94 (82%) 使用问卷，其中许多 (53; 56%) 使用心理测量量表。大多数量表 (39; 74%) 至少报告了一项可靠性测试，但对单一测试的依赖是显着的，这与推荐的做法相反。少数 (35；66%) 报告了有效性测试，但这主要限于结构有效性而不是更全面的测试。令人鼓舞的是，HWI 调查人员越来越多地利用必要的心理测量工具来设计和分析问卷数据，但未能评估超过三分之一已发表的 HWI 态度研究中使用的心理测量量表的有效性或可靠性值得关注。提倡结合更稳健的心理测量量表应用，以促进对与 HWI 相关的利益相关者态度的理解。文章影响声明：了解人类与野生动物互动研究中对野生动物的态度需要强有力地应用社会科学方法。本文受版权保护。版权所有。