Extension usage examples:
Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Article summary:
1. Animal welfare is an important factor in tourists' decisions when it comes to wildlife tourism.
2. This study explored the type of tourists who most likely visit different elephant tourism venues and compared tourist attitudes pre-and post-visit.
3. Results suggest that elephant welfare can be an influencing factor for some tourists, and efforts should be made to increase public awareness of the issues within elephant tourism venues which could lead to positive attitude and behaviour change.
Article analysis:
The article “Does the experience make a difference? Comparing tourist attitudes pre- and post-visit towards the elephant tourism industry” is a well-researched piece that provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of elephant tourism in Thailand, as well as its potential impacts on animal welfare. The authors provide evidence from previous studies to support their claims, such as the fact that 40% of surveyed tourists in Thailand had ridden or planned to ride an elephant during their visit, equating to approximately 12.8 million rides in 2015 (Schmidt-Burbach, 2016). Additionally, they cite research showing that 86% of captive elephants in Thailand were kept in inadequate conditions (Schmidt-Burbach et al., 2015), and a survey indicating a need for improved basic husbandry and routine disease prevention (Miller et al., 2015).
The article also presents demographic information about the types of people who are more likely to visit different types of elephant tourism venues, such as age being the clearest indicator for venue choice. Furthermore, it discusses how tourist experiences at these venues may influence their attitudes towards animal welfare standards at these venues, as well as how educational material can help reduce negative visitor behaviour at wildlife attractions (Bexell et al., 2013; Collins et al., 2019; Orams & Hill, 1998; Sherwen et al., 2014).
In terms of trustworthiness and reliability, this article appears to be unbiased and impartial. It does not appear to have any promotional content or partiality towards any particular viewpoint or opinion. All sides are presented equally with evidence from multiple sources being provided throughout the article. Additionally, all possible risks associated with visiting these venues are noted throughout the text. The only potential issue with this article is that it does not explore counterarguments or present any opposing views on certain topics discussed within it; however, this does not detract from its overall quality or trustworthiness.