Abstract In a recent study about the interactions between farmers and scavenging birds in northwest Patagonia, Argentina, Ballejo et al. (2020) found that perceptions of harm caused by the birds to livestock were not supported by field observations. While acknowledging the contribution made by this study, we argue that management and conservation would benefit from a broader approach that goes beyond the assessment of perceptions of damage to include also an examination of the tangible and intangible drivers of persecution (e.g. intentional poisoning). We describe examples of approaches grounded in the conservation social science framework, integrating disciplines such as social psychology and the science of behavior change, that can be used in a planning cycle to inform the decision-making process in cases of human-wildlife conflict. We end this letter by calling researchers and conservationists worldwide for considering these approaches in order to improve the relationships between human and scavenger birds.

中文翻译：

---

更好地理解人类行为，而不仅仅是“感知”，将支持基于证据的决策并有助于拯救食腐鸟类：对 Ballejo 等人的评论。(2020)

摘要 在最近一项关于阿根廷巴塔哥尼亚西北部农民与食腐鸟类相互作用的研究中，Ballejo 等人。(2020) 发现，现场观察不支持鸟类对牲畜造成伤害的看法。在承认这项研究所做的贡献的同时，我们认为管理和保护将受益于更广泛的方法，该方法超越了对损害感知的评估，还包括对迫害（例如故意中毒）的有形和无形驱动因素的检查。我们描述了基于保护社会科学框架的方法示例，整合了社会心理学和行为改变科学等学科，这些方法可用于规划周期，为人类与野生动物冲突的情况下的决策过程提供信息。