Safety response to COVID-19 and Socialization changes due to COVID—along with three subthemes: Structure leading to separation, Support and belonging amid a pandemic, and Competency. Three overarching themes were identified among the group home staff: Safety response to COVID-19, Increased responsibility, and Mental health changes because of a pandemic. Finally, three overarching themes were identified among the guardians of youth residents: Safety response to COVID-19, Belief in a mental health impact on the child, and Communication during a pandemic. Conclusions: The findings provide the experiences among three group home stakeholders. Overall, they demonstrated resilience in a setting and time when resilience was essential. Finally, the findings offer insight on the basis of which group homes/organizations can prepare for crises of a great magnitude, including vital communication elements.Objective: This study explored the perspectives of being in a youth group home during the COVID-19 pandemic from youth residents, staff, and caregivers. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 9 youth residents, 8 group home staff members, and 13 caregivers of residents. All participants were connected to the group home before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thematic analysis was used to identify lived experience themes. Results: Two overarching themes were identified among the youth residents— COVID-19 has infected and impacted millions of people around the world. The early data suggest that the pandemic had devastating effects on our communities, including youth  Youth inLike much of the world, group homes went on lockdown during the early days of COVID-19, meaning residents were confined to group homes and denied outside social interactions, including with family, without clear notions of when visits would be reestablished or if treatment would be prematurely terminated. Group home staff were asked to work despite relatively unknown risk factors in environments where many common activities were restricted, such as therapy groups and recreational activities.In this qualitative study, we sought to understand the lived experiences of stakeholders in a tertiary residential center treating youth who had sexually assaulted other youth. Our study sought those who experienced the group home both prior to COVID-19 and during the pandemic. This study is informed by elements of the Attachment, Self-regulation, and Competency Model (ARC) and social constructivism. The ARC model provides an intervention framework for children coping with difficult experiences that have interfered with healthy development . Within To date, only a few studies have explored the impacts and experiences in residential care for youth with mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, stakeholders in residential care are likely to be impacted by the pandemic. For example, Wilke et al.  exploredParry and colleagues  exploredThe first and second authors (W.H. & A.A.) were working at the group home before and during the pandemic. We witnessed first-hand the responses from youth, staff, and guardians. We recognize that our experiences as clinicians in the group home during a global pandemic were vastly different from the other roles we sought to better understand. As a doctoral student, one author (W.H.) wondered what research might inform best practices given the unique COVID-19 impact. No related research was identified. This study offers an initial exploration into how youth, their guardians/parents, and staff experienced a residential group home during a global pandemic. From this study, we hope to share their voices, construct knowledge and meaning, and understand the different facets of their lived experiences.A qualitative approach was used to explore and better understand the experiences of group home residents, their guardians, and staff during COVID-19. We used semi-structured interviews to collect information. Institutional review board approval was obtained from the University of Utah prior to recruitment, sampling, and interview procedures.The eligible participants were residents, residents’ parents or guardians, and staff in a group home serving male youth between the ages of 16 and 20 years. Because we were curious about how stakeholders experienced changes resulting from the pandemic, the participants needed to be involved with the group home before the pandemic (before March 2020) and during the pandemic (after March 2020). Convenience sampling was used to identify participants, which included 9 youth residents, 8 staff member, and 13 parents or guardians. The guardians and youth did not need to be related to be included.Admission records, discharge records, and employment records were reviewed to identify qualifying participants. The adult qualifying participants and guardians of qualifying youth participants were contacted in person or via an email explaining the study and notifying them of a follow-up call in 7 days regarding the study. Informed consent, including verbatim mandatory reporting language and requirements, was obtained from the participants. Once the guardians provided informed consent for their child, the youth participants were provided with an assent form and were given the opportunity to ask questions or refuse participation. Compensation was not offered.The principal investigator, pursuing a Ph.D. in social work and having extensive clinical experience working with adolescents, conducted in-depth interviews between March and June 2021; thus, some participants had already been discharged. Interviews were audio-recorded and lasted approximately 60 min. Confidentiality was ensured by conducting interviews in a private setting. Prior to the interview, the purpose of the interview was explained, including the option to withdraw at any time.The interview questions were designed to gain insight into the perspectives, experiences, and impacts of the pandemic in a group home setting. The guiding questions included: “What is it like living in a group home during a pandemic?”; “What is it like working in a group home during a pandemic?”; “What has it been like having a child in a group home during a pandemic?”; “How has the group home been different since the pandemic began?”; “Have the services been different?” “If so, how?”; “Has work been different?”; “If so, how?”; and “What differences have you directly observed or been told about as a guardian of a resident in the group home?”. Once a question was asked, the interviewer would use minimal prompts to encourage the participant to continue speaking until they seemed done with a given question stem.The responses were transcribed verbatim for thematic analyses. Thematic analysis  was utilAll of the youth residents were male, and the majority identified as White (8 out of 9). The average age of the residents was 17.2 (SD = 1.8), with an average of 11.1 years (SD = 1.2) of education. The amount of time spent in the group home ranged from 12–36 months, with an average of 22 months (SD = 7.7).Safety response to COVID-19 and Socialization changes due to COVID-19—and three subthemes: Structure leading to separation, Support and belonging amid a pandemic, and Competency.The thematic analysis identified two overarching themes among the youth residents—The first theme that arose from the resident interviews was safety. The youth residents reflected on the safety precautions put in place because of the pandemic in an attempt to keep COVID-19 out of the group home. Increased safety precautions included handwashing and the use of hand sanitizer, extra cleaning, and restrictions around visitation and leaving the group home campus. Despite the increased safety precautions, many residents shared concerns about contracting the virus while in the group home and their experiences in quarantine. The whole group home went on quarantine because one resident contracted COVID-19 and then it spread. While in quarantine, residents were required to remain in their rooms, separated from staff and others.“We had to wear masks everywhere we went, and then the staff had to wear a mask around us. So, they were safe from us.”(P6)“They got different chemicals to help sanitize then visits would have to be canceled and restrictions.”(P5)“Like if you were sick, you would have to quarantine. Even whether or not it was COVID, they made you quarantine away from the rest of the house. Um, I remember I got a cold, and I was in my room for four days because of it. It was irritating.”(P3)“But that was one of the safety measures they had put on was they made us separate each other. Like we stayed more distanced, like social distancing.”(P7)“They made us wear masks whenever we are indoors, and we have to wear a mask.”(P8)“Every morning before school, they take everybody’s temperatures, little temperature going on your forehead, and you have to be less than 97.5 to be able to go in.”(P3)Subtheme 1: Structure leading to separationThe group home structure changed drastically because of the increased safety precautions. For example, the youth residents were required to attend school via remote instruction , mental health services changed to remote delivery, daily routines changed significantly, and residents’ free time increased dramatically. For residents, the structure prior to COVID was the most important thing in a group home. From waking up at 6 a.m. for hygiene and breakfast to going to bed at 8:30 p.m., the youth were surrounded by structure. Additionally, school, individual therapy, and group therapy provided a structured environment and encouraged time management. When COVID-19 happened, the structure changed drastically. Since therapists and teachers were not considered “essential” workers, there was an absence in the group home. Once sitting in a class with a live teacher, the students connected to teachers over zoom, which made for a challenge among the staff and youth. Additionally, as a result of more downtime in the group, some youth took the opportunity to be productive and resourceful with their time. Among this population, these kinds of structural changes can be detrimental because of the high-risk situations that accompany boredom and a lack of structure.“Um, but so I had to like kind of like be a teacher (when school went to Zoom because of COVID).”(P1)“It (tele-therapy during COVID) was annoying.”(P2)“But most of the time we were stuck in our own room or inside watching TV” .(P4)“Therapy groups changed because of COVID. Um, we would, we would all do it via zoom.”(P9)Sex-specific group homes are different from other group homes. The sex-specific group homes included in this study serve a youth population who have committed a sexual crime. Therefore, residents have specific safety measures and limitations due to their crimes and court orders. The residents at these group homes must always be in the line-of-sight of staff, except when using the bathroom. Freedoms for these residents are limited, and isolation is part of the purpose of this type of group home. However, residents can leave the facility with staff and go to the store, the park, or other parts of the community. Residents generally have regular contact with their families based on their progress in the group home.The residents in these programs tend to enjoy getting out of the group home, always under the supervision of a group home employee, for activities such as shopping, eating, or recreational therapy. Such activities are often integrated into therapeutic efforts, such as providing motivation to make progress, because outings are connected with positive performance in treatment and give the youth an opportunity to maintain a sense of normalcy. Youth look forward to outings, and their loss was expected to be difficult.Among safety precautions, the lack of visitation (upwards of 6 months) with family members falls under the theme of socialization and safety measures. The interpretation of these themes provided that some participants believed that the ban on visits created a lack of socialization for the family, while other participants acknowledged the safety of having no visits; participants shared that having visits and sending residents on a “pass” or having family members come to the group home perpetuated the risk for contracting COVID-19. Part of the reason for visits is to rebuild trust and the family relationship due to the behaviors that removed the youth from their homes. Given the nature of the population, some of whom are reunifying with their families, the lack of visits and, thus, the lack of socialization did not allow the resident to have a trial placement or practice with family members to assess if the resident was ready to return home. Unfortunately, this restriction created a gap in the development of familial relationships. However, it also created a sense of belonging and a support network between the residents and the staff. “We really didn’t understand how serious it (COVID) was.”(P3)“Outings were emotional outlets but were stopped because of COVID.”(P1)“The emotion would be bottled up kind of, and it’s like, I would go home, and I would let out that emotion (pre-COVID). I would talk to my mom. But the emotion would come out when the visit got canceled or the pandemic hit, and we got put on lockdown.”(P2)Subtheme 2: Support & belonging amid a pandemicThe residents of these group homes tend to remain in the group home for an average of about two years. They live with other youth and interact with staff regularly. As can be expected, these youth interact more with staff than their family members while in treatment. Additionally, these youth spend nearly every waking hour together—in the home, in school, in group therapy, and sleeping. The youth are placed with similar youth with similar struggles and barriers. Another subtheme identified in this study of youth residing in group homes is support and belonging amid a pandemic. The participants shared the support they felt from staff and others while living in the group home. Group home staff were present to discuss the challenges that youth faced with the restriction of visits, different therapy assignments, and changes in everyday life. Some participants expressed gratitude for the staff presence and even shared that they keep in contact with staff. The increased time that residents spent with each other created a feeling of belongingness. The participants expressed that, with this increased time, they could be their authentic selves without hiding feelings or issues.“Like I said, I never really looked for support. And now that I have been in the group home, I know what it is like to live life without support, and with support, it is a lot easier to live life. If you have support, I know I was not very close with my mom. In fact, of me my mom really were like butting heads a lot before I got to the group home. But now I feel like we are the closest that I have ever. I am closer now with my mom than I ever have in my whole life. Like the group home really did that. Like change that for me because my mom really has always cared, but I never acknowledged the fact that she cared because I was so set on the fact that I could do it by myself.”(P3)“Well, basically we talked about, uh, well, we would like to do in the future with each other, like going out and watching or camping or going hunting or whatever.”(P2)“But now that I can see a support asking for help is not a sign of weakness. It is a sign of strength.”(P3)“I felt like I got closer with the three boys in my room during those two weeks than I had ever gotten closer with anybody in my entire time at the group home.”(P3)“Like when everybody has this good mentality, it is a lot easier to support the people around than when everybody is stressing out about everything all the time. So, like before the pandemic, we were supporting each other. But like we were not supporting each other as much as we were during the pandemic.”(P4)“No matter what was going on, it was best to have someone that would listen, whether it was a therapist, a staff, another boy, someone to listen was the best thing, and it was a million times better if they could relate.”(P2)“That group setting was really helpful because like they all understand, you did not have to hide things or, you know, it was all out, you know, there was no secret. So helped just you like that was another burden off.”(P1)Subtheme 3: CompetencyThe final subtheme from the youth residents is competency. Because of the change in structure in the group home, some residents were motivated to discharge more quickly while developing therapeutic skills. The researchers believe that competency as a theme developed due to resiliency with the changes forced upon the residents during the pandemic; this created motivation and a drive to complete treatment.“Oh, I changed how I saw stuff- Um, Kind of hard to explain. It (COVID) just pretty much changed the way and how I saw stuff. Cause like it just gave me different perspectives. Uh, it helped me see like how others feel.”(P4)“If I had to do it differently, I would not do it differently, like I would not, it (being in a group home during COVID) was honestly the best thing that happened to me.”(P1)“I was doing other stuff because keeping me company from not being able to see my father on the weekends (loss of visits) to just working and doing my treatment to get out of there so I can see my family and playing sports outside and doing all that fun stuff.”(P6)“But like that was a crazy point because it (COVID) really showed me, hey, now is the time for me to really utilize the skills that I have learned about emotion, mental management, about self-control, that kind of stuff, empathy, all that stuff that I utilized during quarantine time.”(P2)Given the environment and profession for this particular study, the group home staff tend to be male. This sample included six male staff and two female staff, and half of the staff participants identified as White. The average age of the staff was 37.5 (SD = 14.4), with an average of 13.6 years (SD = 1.5) of education. The amount of time spent working in the group home ranged from 14–168 months, skewing the average to 83.8 months (SD = 70.8).Safety response to COVID-19, Increased responsibility, and Mental health changes because of a pandemic.The thematic analysis identified three overarching themes among the group home staff: All of the group participants shared a safety response to COVID-19 as an overarching theme. In this 24 h surveillance facility, the staff work around the clock. There are morning, swing, and grave shifts, which require communication and accountability for the whereabouts and behaviors of residents. For group home staff, this included enforcing different safety measures and helping residents understand the magnitude of the pandemic. The staff were tasked with implementing safety precautions for residents as well as tending to their own physical health. In this context, the staff were required to implement safety precautions such as handwashing/sanitizing, masks, and social distancing, along with the previously mentioned staffing of residents. Unfortunately, the staff were met with resistance from residents about following safety protocols. These researchers believe that this resistance was due to the lack of understanding regarding the severity of the global pandemic and what the risks were. Despite the resident’s protests, the staff were required to follow mandates in accordance with COVID-19-related policies.“It was 24/7 just making sure you were safe and safe enough to where the house was safe.”(P10)“Monitoring them and making sure nothing, no fights break out, or boundaries being crossed. Like 24-h surveillance.”(P11)“So, just monitoring the whole house and dealing with all of that and not wanting to get sick, it was tough.”(P12)“When you leave here, you know, you have to be extra careful as well because you don’t want to bring anything back.”(P17)“The quarantine part when a lot of kids contracted it. That kind of threw me off a little bit just because I take care of my grandma sometimes outside of here, so I did not want to catch anything and bring it to her.”(P11)A great deal of responsibility was placed on the group home staff. Job duties changed drastically as the pandemic unfolded; for example, staff members took on more shifts to cover for others, staff members were tasked with setting up therapy zoom visits, zoom family visits, and zoom sessions for school. Essentially, the staff became the backbone of the group home and took on many different roles such as surrogate teachers and therapists while also maintaining their job duties. As clinicians in the group home (W.H. & A.A.), we were not seen as “essential” workers who needed to be there in-person. We (W.H. & A.A.) heard from residents, staff, and guardians about the various struggles in the group home because of COVID-19, and we occasionally witnessed the increased mental health needs of residents and staff because of the pandemic. Additionally, the staff took on the responsibility of supporting residents with elevated mental health concerns and elevated behaviors such as outbursts. Regardless of their fears, the staff expressed an obligation and commitment to show up to work. Some staff members shared fear about bringing COVID-19 to work, demonstrating a sense of responsibility to the organization and proper health precautions. “If I did not feel safe enough like if I wanted to take time off, I could.”(P12)“The boys did not understand quarantining. They were like, this is stupid. We do not need this.”(P14)“I did not take time off because I felt like the kids needed somebody here.”(P11)“Trying to get through to them that not only is it dangerous for them to be outside the house, but it is dangerous for their families too.”(P14)“That is why through the pandemic and stuff like that, I was always making sure that we could make something work.”(P10)Along with the rest of the world, mental health became a challenge for the group home staff. Because the staff were considered the organization’s backbone, there were challenges regarding mental health in the context of taking care of their mental health. Stress was at an all-time high, along with fears and exhaustion. Some staff described their experiences as burnout. Self-care was identified as a way to tend to mental health among the staff.“Quarantine was nerve-wracking.”(P11)“I got burnt out” [working during COVID-19].(P16)“I can speak for most staff when I say like there are days when it is taxing on my mental health, hearing stories or just everyday behaviors that these guys have.”(P13)“It was just kind of nice to get a, you know, like a five-minute breather from the kids sometimes.” [In reference to working during COVID-19.](P14)“I am a high risk” [to contract COVID-19].(P12)Most of the guardians of the youth residents were female (10 of 13), including mothers and grandmother caregivers. All of the guardian participants identified as White. The average age of the guardians was 45.1 (SD = 5.4), with an average of 13.9 years (SD = 2.1) of education. The amount of time spent having a youth in the group home ranged from 12–60 months, skewing the average to 24.2 months (SD = 13.4).Safety response to COVID-19, Belief in a mental health impact on the child, and Communication during a pandemic.The thematic analysis identified three overarching themes among the guardians of the youth residents: Like the residents, the response to safety arose as an overarching theme for the guardians. The parents spent time sharing their perspectives on how the safety concerns during COVID-19 changed for their youth. Although the parents were not living in the group home, they were provided with up-to-date information about how safety was being managed.“At that point, he had one roommate, and the staff would bring their food, set it at the door, and then step back, so they were maintaining distance.”(P23)“As long as the state, as long as the governor was saying limit, limit gatherings, they kept a locked down. Um, so it was a good six months.”(P26)“They were all wearing masks, um, when they were around people. They did not take them to the stores.”(P23)“But then when I was like hearing of, um, staff members getting COVID and bringing it into the home and the like all the boys got sick, I kind of lost it.”(P22)“So, because of COVID, UM, we were just doing phone calls.”(P30)“There is a sense of relief and feelings of more safety.”(P24)As researchers coded the transcripts, the projection of parents’ mental health on children during the pandemic was brought to light. According to the parents, various factors were found to have impacted the residents’ mental health. Though the parents expressed the mental health impact on the residents, the researchers also acknowledge the mental health challenges among the parents and grandparents. The parents wanted to have visits with their child and were unable to do so, which could have led to the belief that the residents’ mental health was being impacted negatively. Because of the lack of knowledge regarding private conversations between the parents and residents, the degree of the mental health impact on their children is unclear; all that the researchers are aware of is the information provided through semi-structured interviews. Additionally, this is supported by the fact that mental health was not a theme among the youth residents. The residents did not share that their mental health was impacted any more than it was before the pandemic.“He never met with his therapist face to face ever the whole time he was at the group home. Which was not the therapist’s fault and not, you know what I mean? But I think it really negatively impacted his ability to like engage with that therapist. And so, it was less personal than I think it could have been. And I think it could have had a bigger impact than it did because of remote therapy sessions.”(P27)“I know it was a huge difference in his mental stability to be able to have that interaction.” [In reference from going to therapist presence every day to absence by therapists.](P23)“Oh yea, he would definitely would have more of a, he would have his days when he just really was solid.” [In reference to mental health being stable](P19)“I could definitely tell that it made him sad and that he was struggling.”(P28)“Everything else had had to be very trying, especially for people who already deal with depression and stuff like that.”(P19)For a group home to succeed, there needs to be a great deal of communication with many other stakeholders such as caseworkers, juvenile probation officers, and parents. Updates to these groups are often made weekly through progress reports and family therapy sessions. The guardian participants in our study reported notable challenges with the communication between them and the organization. The parents felt like they were not communicated with about the decisions being made, the reasons for the decisions, and updates on their child. They felt frustrated, helpless, and uninformed. The other facet of the communication theme included increased communication between the parents and children. The group home allowed residents to call every day, whereas before, they called three times a week. The group home also allowed for family visits via Zoom, which led to increased contact between families, thus increasing healthy familial relationships. Although the consensus was that communication increased, some guardians shared that their child struggled to keep in contact.“There really wasn’t communication.”(P19)“So, our communication went down a lot when the pandemic hit.”(P21)“We could not see our family, though we called our family every day so we could talk to them.”(P3)“With the pandemic, it was only phone calls, and it was like pulling teeth out sometimes to get him to call.”(P30)“I was late to communication for a little while as a pandemic was only phone calls.”(P22)“Um, we did more family sessions, and sometimes that was so much communication.”(P21)This study is not without limitations. First, our sampling method was a convenience sample including any stakeholder involved in the group home if they met the inclusion criteria. A second limitation of the current study is that group homes for youth who have sexually assaulted other youth are very specific, limiting generalizability. Further, our study was rather homogeneous, which also limits generalizability.A key strength of our study is that it yielded some insight into the lived experiences of several group home stakeholders during the pandemic. We interviewed residents, gaining an in-depth perspective on life in a group home during a pandemic. Additionally, we interviewed staff members of the group home, as their role is vastly different. Finally, we interviewed guardians who had a child in a group home and gained access to an unparalleled and unique perspective. We achieved a fuller picture from seeking insights from multiple participants rather than just one role. Another strength is our overall sample size (N = 30). Finally, this study was conducted with participants who experienced the group home both before and during the pandemic.This study provided subjective evidence of changes experienced by youth residents, staff, and guardians of youth in a group home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Youth residents, staff, and guardians experienced various daily changes and were forced to adapt to new living situations in the group home due to the pandemic. The participants of this study shared their experiences and provided a glimpse of what it is like living in, working in, and having a child in a group home during a global pandemic. While some participants described the pandemic as perpetuating isolation and aloneness, others addressed the positive shift they experienced in terms of their therapy and mental health. Our findings can inform ways of responding to the needs of residents, staff, and guardians during times when normal operating procedures are significantly disrupted.An Assistant Professor of Psychology at Widener University defines resilience as “a sense of hardiness” . Going fFurthermore, this study provides insight on the basis of which group homes/organizations can plan and prepare for crises of a great magnitude in order to maintain mental health, socialization, and skills for youth in these settings. Additionally, the findings inform the need to create more effective communication strategies among all the parties involved. These youth and guardians are already isolated and stigmatized due to their history and their child’s offenses, respectively. Finally, though this article contributes to the current literature, further in-depth research is needed to explore the impact on youth, staff, and guardians in the context of a group home during COVID-19 and the effects it may have.


The results support the assumption of an urban–rural divide in terms of perspectives and values. The discourse indicates that rural actors who are most affected by the wolves’ vicinity have more negative attitudes towards them. At the same time, they feel abandoned and dominated by urban perspectives and politics. In addition, linkages to right-wing populist positions and conspiracy narratives that can be interpreted as a consequence of political alienation are found.Given that wolves have been extinct in Germany for approximately 150 years, their return and growing population over the last decade has caused intense discussion and conflict. To develop a widely accepted and just coexistence between humans and wolves, a comprehensive understanding of the conflict is needed. There are indications that the conflict goes beyond dealing with the wolf population and marks a spatial–cultural divide between urban and rural areas. Nevertheless, the social dimensions of the human–wolf conflict in Germany have been little studied. The aim of this paper is to narrow this gap by means of a media discourse analysis including reader comments in order to provide insights into the constituent elements of this conflict. We conducted a qualitative content analysis. The sample comprises articles ( Worldwide, the recolonization of large carnivores such as wolves and bears often results in human–wildlife conflicts  attention?Against this background, the aim of this study is to narrow this knowledge gap and gain a better understanding of the social conflict over wolves in Germany by means of a media discourse analysis. We follow the working thesis that conflicts surrounding the recolonization of wolves may reveal deeper underlying social tensions, such as the rural‒urban divide , nor would it be useful with regard to the qualitative research approach, we reduced the number of articles for analysis. Qualitative approaches aim to show the range of different qualitative manifestations of a research subject and to theorize possible interrelationships and patterns. Determining the sample size and assessing its appropriateness therefore followed the frequently applied criteria in qualitative research studies of “theoretical saturation,” “informational power,” and “informational redundancy”  had to be a central topic of the article. Only mentioning it was not sufficient.ii.The article must have focused on the normative dimension of the human‒wolf relationship in that meaning was attributed to this relationship. It did not matter whether the normativity came directly from the author or, for example, in the context of an interview or quotation.iii.High numbers of reader comments attributed to an article were regarded as indicating high resonance by either favouring this perspective or holding antagonistic views. It can therefore be argued that these articles constitute good representations of discursive struggles, and they were preferentially included in our sample.The selection of these articles was guided by the following criteria:Data processing was performed using MAXQDA software. All the articles and reader comments were evaluated and interpreted following the seven-step guide to qualitative content analysis by Kuckartz  on the bThe results show varying discourse themes around wolves and variations in the frequency with which the different media cover wolves  actor groups and their mutual relations or perspectives/perceptions, including conflict over interpretative sovereignty; (2) an instrumental utility discourse about benefits versus costs, risks and goal conflicts connected with wolf resettlement; (3) an urban–rural divide and political alienation; 4) links to right-wing populist discourses, narratives of conspiracy and forms of escalation; and (5) issues in wolf management. Table  links toi.agriculture versus nature conservation andii.rural people versus the “urban elite”.Actors with opposing values, perspectives and interests are a central part and constituting category of the “human–wolf” conflict in Germany, which largely indicates a social conflict over wolves. The results show that views in the conflict about wolf resettlement in Germany are characterized by two strongly opposed dichotomies:In addition, there are distinct actor groups, such as politicians, scientists and experts, hunters and the media, forming or supporting the parties in the conflict. In the content studied here, these positionings resulted from attribution of criticism and devaluation of opposing positions. It was apparent that the conflict over the reintroduction of wolves is also a conflict over interpretative sovereignty. Frequently, strategies were used to devalue opposing arguments and strengthen the actor’s own position. Credibility, expertise and knowledge became contested attributes denied to the other side through degrading attributions. These devaluation mechanisms were used by wolf supporters and wolf opponents alike but with different attributions and levels of intensity. Thus, references to other social groups of actors came primarily from opponents of the wolf-recolonization efforts. From the perspective of many wolf-resettlement opponents, nature conservationists and urban people were “wolf romanticists” and “wolf freaks” with “eco-social romantic fairy tale ideas” who are “far removed from reality”. Further attributions included that they are “ignorant and [have a] know-it-all attitude”, they enforce “double standards” and tell “lies”, they “lack expertise”, and they engage in “unobjective/ideological/emotional discussions”.Opponents of wolf recolonization considered politicians to lack a firm “grip on reality” and “expertise” and to be “idle/actionless” while practising politics only for the benefit of the “urban elite”. Some wolf-recolonization opponents accused the media of being biased and “pro-wolf”. However, the analysis of the positioning of the articles studied contradicted this accusation (see 3.1), as it showed that media coverage of the wolf population is varied and not one-sided.In contrast, some proponents of wolf resettlement accused those opposed of “scaremongering”, having “irrational fears”, exhibiting “hysteria”, and engaging in an “emotional debate”. Farmers were considered “complainers” who destroy nature with their agricultural practices.Another main theme throughout the media articles and reader comments was a benefit-versus-cost discourse. The “damage” caused by wolves was frequently used as an argument against wolf resettlement. Often mentioned, damage included “livestock killed by the wolves”, potential “risks to people and especially to children”, “fear of wolf attacks” and a resulting “diminished quality of life” due to the perceived restricted range of motion for humans and playground areas for children. In addition, the cost of prevention measures funded by taxpayer money was criticized. Target conflicts in nature conservation were cited, particularly regarding the high nature value of extensive pastureland, which is regarded as endangered by wolf recolonization. A further ethical conflict was seen regarding animal welfare when wolves kill grazing animals in fenced pastureland.Q2: “But here, where every German citizen has only 2000 square metres of usable space to ‘survive’, one should differentiate a little as to who is allowed to sit at the table. The wolf does not fit here.” (Reader_TopAgrar)In addition to the discourse about damage, the general benefits of having wolves were questioned by wolf-recolonization opponents . In particular, wolf recolonization in Germany’s densely populated “cultural landscape” was repeatedly denounced (Q2–4). Here, the statements documented the perception of or fear of competition with wolves and the narrowing of humans’ interests and scope for action:Strikingly, the wording of comments frequently implied active settlement by wolves instead of a natural dispersal process (Q3).Q6:“If a tiger is shot in India, the German is the first to raise a finger. But we don’t care about our own fauna.” (Reader_Spiegel)Reader comments also included arguments for the protection of species of larger predators in distant regions of the world but not in their own immediate vicinity (Q4). This form of colonization of other countries to further species conservation was considered critical by some wolf-recolonization advocates, who noted that the conservation of large carnivores and mammals in countries in the Global South is more precarious (Q5-6).Q12: “As you often hear, the fears you describe exist, whether justifiably or not is irrelevant. I ask myself why we want to do this to ourselves, or to those who are afraid, just to prove a few opinionated wolf romantics right. Fear is not a nice thing, and one should not make fun of it.” (Reader_NOZ)While some saw the wolf as an unnecessary “luxury” that causes great financial damage, which must be remedied by adequate compensation, a main argument against wolf dispersal was the perceived fear and risk of humans being attacked by wolves (Q7-8), especially the danger that wolves present to children, which was a recurring theme in the discourse (Q9). This fear, particularly of the danger posed to children by wolves, was a motif that ran throughout the reader comments (Q10-11). In this context, the feeling of not being taken seriously was also found.In contrast, the views and arguments expressed by supporters of and experts in wolf resettlement revealed that compared with other everyday risks, they viewed the risk as very low or acceptable. Compared with wolf-recolonization opponents, who focused on the uncertainty and potential risk posed by future developments, wolf-recolonization supporters and experts highlighted that there have been no fatal wolf attacks on humans thus far (Q13). Other arguments emphasized that humans constantly live with certain risks (Q14). In addition, proponents of wolf recolonization argued for the potential benefits of wolves as a regulating force against game browsing and damage to crops. They considered the wolf to play an important role in “reestablishing the ecological balance”. In the Lusatian region, a main habitation area for wolves in Germany, tourism experts even believe that the wolf population has the potential to become a tourist attraction (Q15).Beyond a pure cost–benefit argumentation that considers the wolf merely from an instrumental utility perspective, there were also reader opinions that attributed an intrinsic value to the wolf. These actors criticized the colonial dominance of humans and recognized the right of the wolf as a species to exist for its own sake. However, this last argument was rarely put forward.The reader comments documented contrasting perceptions of the realities of life in the city and the country, coupled with processes of political alienation. The discourse painted a picture of disparity between city and country, between an “urban elite” and the rural population (Q16). There was a perceived political “dominance by urban people” and their opinions over the rural population. At the same time, the rural population was portrayed as an oppressed minority (Q17–18).Q19: “The people in the areas where wolves live are already suffering from massive restrictions on their quality of life. […] It’s unfair for nature-minded urban people to be in favour of the wolf, which they will never encounter in their lives!” (Reader_FAZ)Q20: “We are bombarded with wolf propaganda by the nature conservation authorities. But when concerned graziers show the cruel reality, the state authorities intervene. What a complete dismissal of the rural population!” (Reader_TopAgrar)In addition, the difference in the degree to which urban and rural populations are affected by wolf recolonization was emphasized by some readers’ comments. The support for wolf resettlement found among urban people, who are rarely affected by the presence of the wolves, was perceived as arrogance towards the rural population (Q19–22).Here, a motif of perceived spatial injustice emerges, which was also associated/contextualized with other developments and conflicts in rural areas, such as the energy transition and the conflictual designation of areas for wind turbines (Q23) or the growing demand for organic food and sustainable agricultural practices, which increasingly pressures farmers to change (Q24). Urban people were accused of lacking an understanding of nature, being out of touch with reality, and lacking judgement (Q25–27). The city of Berlin recurred not only as a symbol of urban living and as an urban space but also, alongside the city of Brussels, as a political centre of power where decisions about rural areas are made removed from the context in which the issues occur (“in distant Berlin”) (Q28–29). Mixed into this was also a demonstrable loss of trust in politics and the state, feelings of political alienation and sympathy with populist positions . Politicians were frequently accused of inaction, but the opposite was found in the media coverage. Despite the many other challenges brought by development in rural regions, such as demographic change, the wolf population received special attention and played a comparatively large role in both the media and politics (Q33). Thus, the wolf recolonization conflict was discussed at the highest political levels during the study period, including by the Chancellery, the Prime Minister of Saxony, and the Ministers of the Environment and Agriculture.The political alienation that was evident in the analysed material was regularly linked to sympathy for right-wing populists and antidemocratic positions (Q30–32). In the discourse on the wolf population, vocabulary typically used by right-wing populist groups appeared conspicuously often. The use was documented exclusively in reader comments by those opposed to wolf recolonization in Germany. In addition to the motif of the “lying press” (Q34-35), there were recurring allusions to “conspiracies” by “elites” and rejecting the European Union, and references to the 2015/2016 refugee crisis in Germany and Europe were made using the term “Willkommenskultur” (Q36), which was influential at that time.It was not just the reader comments that took up this issue; the articles themselves examined it as well. The articles revealed that defensiveness about wolf recolonization is being made an election campaign issue by the right-wing populist party AFD in Germany (Q37–38). In fact, the Federal Minister of Agriculture considered the wolf an “AFD acceleration programme”, as anti-wolf positions were strongly represented by and related to the AFD party.In addition, various conspiracy narratives were found in the reader comments. One common narrative was that the wolves are hybrids that were deliberately brought to Germany and released. Another narrative asserted that important information was being kept secret (Q39). It alleged a conspiracy among scientists, politicians and actors from NGOs: scientists were purportedly falsifying results in their expert reports, and NGOs would earn money from the wolves.The media discourse on wolves is divisive and polarizing, and there are signs of increasing escalation and intensity in the conflict, which manifest in hostility and threats. Not only emotional statements and mutual accusations but also insults were observed in exchanges between the parties in the conflict, and these pointed to hardened positions (Q40). In addition, various forms of protest, such as vigils, demonstrations and social media campaigns, as well as calls for “illegal wolf killing”, were mentioned. This call for criminal action was justified as a form of self-defence (Q41–43).One of the most frequently discussed topics were wolf management issues. These included “stock regulation/wolf population control”, subsequent demands for “legislative changes”, aspects of “herd protection” and “compensation payments”, demands for “conflict management” and “counselling and information services”, such as training and education to increase public knowledge about wolves.Overall, in concrete discussions of suitable wolf management measures, the discourse notably took on a more objective tone. Emotional or sarcastic expressions were less commonly observed. The positions expressed seemed more conciliatory and solution-oriented, and the conflict appeared less intense in such discussions.Regarding population regulation, there were very few voices in favour of extirpating the wolf completely, but many favoured population regulations. Opinions ranged from allowing “strict population regulation/sharp hunting” (Q44–45), setting an “upper limit” on moderate regulation and removing wolves “in case of danger” or “problem wolves”. The latter is also seen and advocated as a measure to promote acceptance of the wolf population (Q46). The demands for wolf population regulation went hand in hand with demands for legislative changes that allow the removal of wolves as well as the designation of wolf-free or protected grazing areas. In addition, herd protection measures and the adaptation of pasture management, including installing fences, stable security, using guard dogs and scaring away wolves, were discussed. Commenters who had already had good experiences with these measures also spoke up here. There were several indications that damage from wolves mainly occurs where there is no or minimal herd protection.There were many reader comments that demanded comprehensive “compensation payments” for the herd protection measures enacted and the damage caused by wolves. However, this appears to be somewhat irritating, as 100% of these costs are already being reimbursed. In this context, it seems natural that the idea of “conflict management” was often alluded to in the articles (Q47) in reference to learning processes, training and information services that could increase acceptance.The aim of this article was to analyse the human‒wolf conflict in German media discourse, determining how the conflict is constituted and documented, whether it is a symbol of an urban‒rural divide, and why the topic is covered so intensively in the media. In the following, we will discuss our findings in relation to results from other geographical contexts (5.1) and justify our argument that the human‒wolf conflict is indicative of broader societal conflicts, such as the urban‒rural divide (5.2).Our findings about the human–wolf conflict in Germany have much in common with the results of studies in other regions of Europe and North America. The return for wolves in regions where they have been previously extinct creates conflicts (e.g., Ericsson and Heberlein Dressel et al.  have shoOur analysis further reveals a prevailingly utilitarian discourse in the German media that questions the wolf against the background of a cost–benefit discourse. The wolf is seen as “useless” and harmful by farmers, and its presence thus deepens the already existing conflict between stakeholders in agriculture and in nature conservation (see also Friedrich et al. The observation by Figari and Skogen  that theAll the media investigating the wolf topic continually reported on it. The issue received significant attention, and the debate can be regarded as emotionalized. A similar level of attention was also observed in Northern European countries after wolf populations began to spread again (Ericsson and Heberlein Consistent with Wilson’s  observatMoreover, these results show that the wolf symbolizes the political alienation of the rural population, who feel dominated by urban worldviews influencing policies and the will of supposed majorities. Eriksson  showed tAdditionally, some scientists, especially ecologists normatively involved in conservation, seem dismissive of these concerns. As an example, Chapron and López‐Bao  criticizNevertheless, the geographical and spatial disparities between urban and rural areas have led to increasing social distortions in recent years, which are also reflected in the successes of right-wing populist parties (e.g., Kallert et al. However, further research is needed to elaborate whether the conflict line is the rural‒urban divide or whether other conflict lines are congruent with this line; thus, other sociocultural aspects may be relevant, as described in recent theoretical and empirical sociological research in Germany (e.g., Lux et al. In Europe, wolf recolonization is a result of, and supported by, international nature conservation law, such as the Washington and Berne Convention and the EU Habitats Directive. However, this is a top-down approach that insufficiently considers local specificities and region-specific development opportunities in rural areas. The wolf and its coexistence with humans thus seem politically imposed, which inhibits successful coexistence (König et al. To date, human‒wolf conflict in Germany remained understudied. In particular, qualitative analyses that allow for an integrative understanding are lacking. The present media analysis contributes towards filling this gap. Overall, it shows that media analyses achieve considerable density in the qualitative description of human‒wildlife conflicts. However, this description takes place on a superordinate aggregated societal level, which can differ greatly from local specific and varying manifestations. In addition, media filter information according to newsworthiness and also attention or entertainment value. However, even the reader comments analysed here do not provide a representative depiction of the human‒wolf conflict but rather indicate the different dimensions and facets that play a role. For a deeper understanding of the conditions for successful coexistence, therefore, further analyses are needed that look at different local characteristics and also at the interactions of different social factors with varying management instruments and communication approaches.The recolonization of wolves in densely populated cultural landscapes causes major social conflicts reflected by a high amount of media attention. There is a divide in the perspectives of urban and rural actors, which is supported by the narrative of “pro-wolf” urbanites and “anti-wolf” ruralites and is also visible in the media coverage. The unequal distribution of the nonmaterial costs and benefits of the recolonization of the wolf population results in “coexistence inequalities”, which in turn may lead to political alienation and a sense of imposition. However, the human–wolf conflict symbolizes a larger conflict based on spatial disparities and inequalities between urban and rural areas. Damage prevention and compensation measures alone will not be sufficient to resolve the conflict. Going forward, it will be important to consider regionally specific development options, strengthen local decision-making competences and facilitate honest participation and dialogue so that different actors with different opinions are valued in decision-making. Only in this way can a just and sustainable coexistence between humans and wolves be established.Supplementary Information


Web videos have gradually replaced text, voice, pictures, and other information carriers to become an important way of information dissemination in the new media era. As digital technology brings a new dissemination ecology, the original dissemination trust theory and its framework are facing the crisis of explanatory power failure. This paper considers the popular science web video as an object of study. It analyses and interprets the development of popular science web videos based on the evolution of dissemination form and the basic principle of social trust, from perspectives such as mediology, informatics, and sociology. To maintain or improve the trust relationship in web videos, it's necessary to find positive incentive and reverse punishment, and establish a trust certification and regulation mechanism. In this way, active dissemination and sharing of information can be promoted for a more vigorous society and culture. Moreover, this paper explores a new way of web video development from the perspective of trust. Report of China's Short Video Industry Market Competition Pattern and Development Prospects Forecast in 2020–2025 by Zero Power Intelligence Group, a research institution headquartered in Shenzhen, by the year of 2020, the total number of short video users in China has reached 773 million, accounting for 85.6% of Chinese Internet users, registering an 11.5% increase compared with 2018; and the total number of web videos users in China has reached 850 million, accounting for 94.1% of Chinese Internet users.Humans' thirst for knowledge and information has always been an essential prerequisite and theme in the process of human survival, development, and evolution. Since China was officially connected to the Internet in the early 1990s, its Internet technology has experienced a dramatic growth, which greatly changed the way people accepted and disseminated information. According to the Today, China's Internet technology has gradually grown from a “follower” to a “leader.” In this wave of changes in information dissemination technology driven by network dissemination technology, China is bound to explore a new way that is in line with its national conditions and meets the people's needs of popular science. Among the carriers of Internet information dissemination, web video, a new carrier following the text, image, audio, and other information carriers, becomes a key channel for most consumers to acquire information. The content of web videos is all-inclusive and can be roughly summed up into four categories: emotion, interest, popular science, and encouragement.This paper considers popular science web video as the subject of the study. Based on the evolution of dissemination and the basic principle of social trust, and from the perspectives of mediology, informatics, and sociology, this paper analyses and interprets the development of popular science web videos. It introduces the development and influence of popular science web videos from four aspects of social trust, the influence of information on trust, the logic that information affects users through trust, and the role of trust in information interaction.The authors of this thesis mainly used regression analysis. The basic database is obtained through the collection of basic data, and then the testers were categorised and observed through different questions to finally obtain useful research data; the data were analysed and studied through statistical methods to find statistical patterns of variables among the testers. This study aims to discern how different testers perform when confronted with information from different sources and with different content. The researcher can determine what sources of information the test taker trusts more and what content information is more acceptable to the test taker based on the test taker's performance.To sort out the research on web videos in China, this paper uses “web videos” as the literature keyword to search at CNKI. The summarized results show that current academic studies on “web videos” are closely related to the development of China's video industry.videos with good click-through rate on Youku and their future development mode [the control and regulation during the development of video websites [The development of Internet technology and web videos industry has driven related academic research. Before 2007, most studies on web videos focused on the searching of TV programs and columns online. The research subjects were mainly video publishers with self-built websites, such as the CCTV network. . As videwebsites . After 2Foreign studies on web videos are different from domestic research. In foreign literature, the keywords for short video are divided into two categories, namely “short video” and “clip.” Clips are videos within 60 seconds and with edited content. Considering the expression and transmission degrees, they are less efficient at conveying information to the audience than short videos. Therefore, “short video” is selected as the keyword for the research.Currently, many foreign journals have published studies on “short video.” After studying the motivation of producers, some researchers propose that producers of short videos are driven by both external and internal information factors, which prompt them to produce more professional videos –7. AfterLiterature, home and abroad, provides very comprehensive research on web videos. Subjects of studies range from video portals, video producers to viewers. Researchers of different times have carried out macro analysis of the web video industry. For example, some apply the academic concept of information science to analyze how video websites connect information senders with receivers with “emotional interaction” . There aAcademically, the frequently referred “web videos” can be defined with two concepts. One is “Internet audio-visual program service” and the other is “web video users.” With the first concept, web video can be defined as “activities to produce, edit, integrate, and provide video and audio programs to the public through the Internet and activities that allow others to upload audio-visual programs.” . With thhttps://baidu.com), a well-known Chinese search engine, used to be the most active knowledge-sharing community. As the number of its users grew, more information was included by this search engine. Its platforms such as “Baidu Know” and “Baidu Entry”, and “Baidu Encyclopedia”, which allowed users to edit and reprocess information, attracted hundreds of millions of information publishers. Thanks to those publishers, Baidu won its reputation as the most favorable search engine. However, due to the pursuit of commercial interests and a lack of regulation, Baidu began to adopt advertisements as answers for questions entered into its search engine. The knowledge or answer to a question will automatically jump to websites of business organizations or entities through a false link, from which “Baidu” charges network promotion fees or click fees from website owners. This has greatly damaged the trust of information users in “Baidu” and dampened the commitment to build trust. The loss of trust from users threatened the status of Baidu as a search engine. Meanwhile, new media, especially short video platforms, upgraded traditional 2D information to 3D version, giving information receivers a better experience. As a result, Baidu is no longer the only source of information.At early times, web videos mainly consisted of TV programs or on-demand programs uploaded by traditional TV media at its portal. Therefore, information receivers' trust of web videos is because they trust the news facts provided by traditional TV media. As computer technology and Internet technology develops and become popular, the production threshold of web videos is lowered, and more information receivers begin to publish information themselves. The increase in information publishers makes it more difficult for information receivers to obtain useful information. Baidu (https://bilibili.com) is different from most information communication platforms, for it refuses to lower threshold for potential users. Instead, it set an “entrance test,” a unique user screening system, for every new user. Users need to fill out personal information and pass the test before registering as a member of the platform. Although such a process discourages users from participation, it helped Bilibili capture and understand user behavior with more accuracy. In this way, it can provide customized topics and content to users, ensuring the users' “purity” and viscosity.As one of the most popular short video platforms, Bilibili  sociology-based macroresearch on trust and (2) psychology-based microresearch on trust. Academic achievements of individuals will affect their level of basic trust .According to the survey, information receivers with a Bachelor's degree or higher and those who grow up in a good academic atmosphere and living conditions can better recognize useful information and trust their choice. Belief in science prompts them to use their own common sense or multidisciplinary knowledge to find useful information. Good academic atmosphere and living conditions provide them with the methodology to check the information they have received. In face of unknown knowledge, they can make academic judgment independently and adjust the high level of trust. If the acquired knowledge reaches their expected trust level, a positive expectation value will be generated, and the receivers will have higher expectations of the information Tables  and 6.When it comes to the word “relationship,” people may associate it with “acquaintances” and “strangers.” “Acquaintances” refer to a group of people with close relations and frequent communication with an individual. Acquaintances, an important component of the “F-Factors” in the information influence, can not only be generated by blood, kinship, geography, academic relationship, and industry relationship, but also be transformed by strangers through frequent communication.With the rise of new information technologies, such as the Internet, interpersonal communication will break geographical limitations, and more people will become acquainted through network communication. Information dissemination, which is affected by the “F-Factors” in web videos, will also become a mainstream phenomenon. For example, in choosing a web video that analyzes an electronic product, information receivers will prefer those from information publishers with similar values; when acquiring new knowledge, they tend to take suggestions from the “F-Factors” .“In an industrial society full of human migration and flow, communication occurs not only between acquaintances, but also among strangers” . StrangeNowadays, information receivers find it easy to acquire information but hard to integrate time and space. The cost of transforming strangers into acquaintances also increases. In this context, analogy mechanism between strangers is born. This mechanism comes from the circle of interpersonal relationships. As a saying goes, “Two strangers will be able to establish links by no more than six people,” which is the basic concept of analogy mechanism. The analogy mechanism works as follows: given that A and B are familiar, and B and C are familiar, if A trusts B, then without additional factors, A trusts C because A analogizes its trust to C. The “Influencer” and “KOL” in web videos analogize some people's trust into a new field of knowledge, so as to ensure the normal circulation of information Tables  and 9.Social networking, virtual technology, and industrialization not only improve technological life, but also lead to large-scale migration and flow of people. As a result, changes occur in interpersonal relationships and the way of obtaining information, and trust relationship.Factors affecting the security of trust include subjective and objective ones. It aims to discern how different testers perform when confronted with information from different sources and with different content. The researcher can determine what sources of information the test taker trusts more and what content information is more acceptable to the test taker based on the test taker's performance.Subjective factors affecting information lie in the initiative of information receivers to verify information credibility. When information receivers need information, they will not only tap into their own experiences and judgment, but also take information from “acquaintances” or other information senders as a reference to evaluate information credibility. In other words, a preliminary trust relationship between senders and receivers has been established during information disseminationTables –12.According to the survey, information receivers will be more active to evaluate information credibility when it is not consistent with their cognition. Moreover, the verification of unknown information by one receiver will affect others' trust in the same or similar information. Information receivers sharing the same values are more likely to influence each other and become information publishers themselves. What's more, receivers' initiative to verify information credibility depends on their personal willingness. However, when there are large discrepancies between online information and life experience, information receivers will be discouraged and refuse to take the initiative to verify the information as they cannot get rewards from it Tables  and 14.In addition to subjective factors such as “F-Factors,” objective factors also affect the security of trust during information dissemination. Under certain time and space, objective factors will determine receivers' trust of information. For example, some information publishers of web videos about technology products, such as mobile phones and computers, will accept brand promoters' request to spread false information. Some other information publishers may make comments on topics unrelated to their own professional fields. When information receivers find that they are misled through verification, they will lose trust in the publishers or the brand. However, information errors will be found out eventually and replaced by correct ones, as information can be processed by both information publishers and receivers at the same time.Lower threshold of video release comes with lower threshold of information error correction. According to the survey, professional information receivers are mostly motivated by academic rigor to correct information from the publisher. The obligation of knowledge sharing and a sense of accomplishment rank as the second and third reasons. However, trust certification and regulatory mechanisms in the industry still need to improve. Most publishers of videos at the sci-tech zone of Bilibili are neither scientists nor researchers with achievements. The keywords of these videos concentrate on “user experience,” “test,” and “disassembly.” Unlike scientific research, these videos only provide reference data from the perspective of consumers without showing further scientific values. Although this caters to the demands of information receivers, it undoubtedly shows a lack of regulations and reviewing standards for web videos. To promote dissemination and provide entertainment, publishers often re-process and examine the information of their peers in the name of “rumor refuting” and “correction.” Although this forms continuous correction and improvement of knowledge, it produces many homogeneous, homogenized, and entertainment-oriented videos, which will affect the information received. As a result, consumers may doubt the publishers, the content, and even the brand.Ordinary information receivers accept information from information publishers through web video platforms, who obtain the preliminary trust from information receivers by transmitting the information needed by information receivers. Web video platforms transmit more personalized information to information receivers via the preliminary trust. After acquiring new knowledge and information through customized services by the platform, information receivers further trust web video platforms, forming a positive incentive process. Moreover, online popular science videos are created based on publishers' full understanding of the objective facts and with an entertainment way of expression. Information receivers' recognition of this trust relationship is restricted by their own academic level, knowledge, and theoretical attempts. It is also influenced by interpersonal relationships and the corresponding system.Popular science web videos are undergoing an important transition. Compared with entertainment short videos on platforms such as TikTok and Kwai, traditional popular science videos gradually lose their attraction to information receivers due to information overload and long time, thus affecting trust in information. Therefore, the publishers should cram as much as possible high-quality content in one short video and lower the threshold of receiving information through various mechanisms to encourage information receivers to trust the video as soon as possible.In the future, trust of information should be constructed due to the difference between the subjects and objects formed through the receivers applying the new information to their own common sense and social experience. During the dissemination of information, the receivers will evaluate information credibility based on the historical performance of the publishers and whether they have fulfilled the commitment. The path and mechanism of trust generation is a repeated process of strengthening incentives, in which commitments are made and fulfilled constantly. To maintain or improve the trust relationship in web videos, it's necessary to find both positive incentive and negative punishment. Moreover, a trust certification and regulation mechanism should be established. In this way, the active dissemination and sharing of information can be promoted for a more vigorous society and culture.


We analyze the “Logical fallacies and reasonable debates in invasion biology: a response to Guiaşu and Tindale” article by Frank et al., and also discuss this work in the context of recent intense debates in invasion biology, and reactions by leading invasion biologists to critics of aspects of their field. While we acknowledge the attempt by Frank et al., at least in the second half of their paper, to take into account more diverse points of view about non-native species and their complex roles in ecosystems, we also find the accusations of misrepresenting invasion biology, for instance by “cherry-picking” and “constructing ‘straw people’”, directed at the Guiaşu and Tindale study to be unwarranted. Despite the sometimes harsh responses by leading invasion biologists to critics of their field, we believe that persistent and fundamental problems remain in invasion biology, and we discuss some of these problems in this article. Failing to recognize these problems, and simply dismissing or minimizing legitimate criticisms, will not advance the cause, or enhance the general appeal, of invasion biology and will prevent meaningful progress in understanding the multiple contributions non-native species can bring to various ecosystems worldwide. We recommend taking a more open-minded and pragmatic approach towards non-native species and the novel ecosystems they are an integral part of. We acknowledge the attempt by Frank et al.  to analyIn their response to the Guiaşu and Tindale  article,Guilt by association remains a problem in invasion biology, as discussed by Guiaşu and Tindale . An examLythrum salicaria) revealed that this much maligned introduced wetland plant, originally from Europe, does not reduce biodiversity in North American wetlands after all and can provide useful resources for a variety of native animals on this continent  in North America (Koenig Faxonius rusticus) , commonly referred to as the rusty crayfish. This major decline, which occurred since the early 1990s, resulted in reduced crayfish species diversity and significantly lower, or even lost, populations of all crayfish species in this vast region. The rusty crayfish was indeed rare in this region, but local populations of this species declined by 91% during this period of time. This suggests that similar changing environmental factors, such as possibly reduced calcium concentrations in lakes, are negatively affecting all crayfish species in this region, regardless of their perceived native or non-native status. Edwards et al.  in North America , increases in Al concentrations, and reduced Ca concentrations in these lakes are negatively affecting crayfish populations.” Thus, the effect of smallmouth bass mentioned in this study was based on a hypothesis, rather than an established fact-based conclusion. Furthermore, it could be argued that Frank et al. , and/or with human assistance to other parts of this province. In their monumental classic book on the freshwater fishes of Canada, which remains the most comprehensive work of its kind, Scott and Crossman  mentioneIn a much more recent guide to the freshwater fishes of Ontario, Holm et al.  stated tCambarus crayfish species of Ontario and found that one of these two species (C. robustus) dominates the other one (C. bartonii) in interspecific agonistic contests. The two species have similar habitat requirements and life cycles, and the dominant species, C. robustus, appears to have expanded its range in Ontario, possibly at the expense of C. bartonii. It is possible that C. robustus may competitively exclude C. bartonii from some locations where the ranges of these two species overlap. Because both of these crayfish species are considered native in Ontario, the apparent displacement of C. bartonii by C. robustus from some regions of this province was not of concern, and was considered perfectly natural. However, if a crayfish species suspected of being non-native, such as F. rusticus, expands its range, in Ontario or elsewhere, conservation and invasion biologists interested in crayfish consider this to be a negative development, and advocate control and eradication programs to stop “the invasion” (for example, Hamr For example, Guiaşu , 2016, GFrank et al.  claimed The problem, however, is not with the perfectly accurate and logical way in which Guiaşu and Tindale  analyzedWhen legitimately criticized for the obviously negative attitudes towards non-native species their field is based on, such invasion biologists retreat to the position that they do not dislike all non-native species, just the few with negative effects on ecosystems. But in fact, the application of their own version of the “precautionary principle” means that they generally regard non-native species as problematic or potentially problematic from the start, and monitor these species looking for harmful effects. And even if such harmful effects cannot be found, non-native species can never be fully exonerated, since the harmful effects may not become apparent until later, at an undetermined point in the future, possibly centuries from now. Can we really make conservation plans now, and take action against species without any proven negative impacts, just in case some of them may turn “bad” somehow centuries from now? Is this a realistic conservation goal that should be seriously and urgently debated at this time? Don’t we have more pressing and more immediate environmental concerns and priorities? Many environmental changes, quite a few of them undoubtedly hard or impossible to predict with great accuracy, will occur during the next few centuries, and trying to anticipate now which species may cause problems hundreds of years into the future seems like an impractical pursuit.This problem is even more challenging, because invasion biology is not good at generating useful predictions about which non-native species are most likely to have negative effects—a fact acknowledged even by several researchers in this field (for example, Simberloff If species presumed to be non-native arrive at new locations and do not have any negative effects, and since invasion biologists seem to agree that the vast majority of non-native species do not have negative effects overall, the likelihood of ecological and economic problems due to those species should be low. Therefore, advocating the eradication of such species as soon as possible after their arrival, as Simberloff has repeatedly done (for example, in Instead of coming to terms with the obvious implications of their version of the “precautionary principle”, and acknowledging the potential problems with this “guilty until proven innocent” approach to non-native species, some invasion biologists and their allies prefer to just repetitively accuse their critics of “misrepresentation” and “cherry-picking”. Guiaşu and Tindale  simply aIn any case, it should be possible to disagree with invasion biologists about the meaning, wisdom, and usefulness of the “guilty until proven innocent”, or “precautionary”, principle, as applied to non-native species, without having to face accusations of “science denialism”—an accusation Frank , for exaThere is, moreover, a certain irony in seeing the charge of “science denialism” delivered against scholars who have raised concerns about a “guilty until proven innocent” principle. Among the common factors recognized by those who study science denialism is “setting impossible expectations for what science can achieve” McIntyre . InsofarFurthermore, determining whether the overall effect of a species on an ecosystem, a habitat, or other species is negative or not is often a highly subjective exercise (Schlaepfer et al. In fact, invasion biologists do not even recognize non-native species as a legitimate part of the biodiversity of ecosystems into which these species have been introduced, in some cases centuries ago, and therefore refuse to include such species in biodiversity inventories and biodiversity indices Guiaşu . For insAs discussed in the previous section, the precautionary principle is frequently invoked by some invasion biologists as a justification for controlling or eliminating, or preventing the introduction of, non-native species (for example, in Simberloff The precautionary principle has many formulations and can be interpreted in a variety of ways, which can lead to confusion (Foster et al. Furthermore, funds allocated for control and eradication programs against non-native species may be better spent for other, perhaps more useful, conservation or environment-related initiatives. In other words, in the absence of relevant information, the precautionary principle can be used to justify both taking action and not taking action against a particular species, so this would not seem to be a particularly useful guide for dealing with non-native species in general.In a response to the invocation of the precautionary principle by Vitule et al.  to justiLarson et al.  advised However, in their response to Larson et al. , SimberlIn a devastating critique of the precautionary principle as it is applied to the preservation of biodiversity, Newman et al.  concludeSunstein  found thLarson  criticizFrank et al.  also accBiological Invasions.” In fact, Guiaşu and Tindale (Frank et al.  then sta Tindale  accurate Tindale  study. A Tindale . Even Fr Tindale  appear t Tindale  for accu Tindale  survey t Tindale  agree th Tindale  then acc Tindale  of not m Tindale . It is nMore recently, Gbedomon et al.  conducteTherefore, it does appear that the “consensus” about non-native species invoked by some leading invasion biologists may not be as strong as they claim.We appreciate the attempt to understand alternative points of view about non-native species, and the more positive overall approach, taken by Frank et al. , at leasThe more measured and careful overall response by Frank et al.  is in shIt could be argued that articles such as the ones by Russell and Blackburn  and RiccNot surprisingly, there was strong pushback by a variety of ecologists and other researchers (for example, Crowley et al. Based on these recent exchanges in the scientific literature on non-native species, we see no particular reason to be optimistic, in general, that the opposing sides in this debate are getting closer to reaching a common ground at this time.The problems associated with invasion biology identified by Guiaşu and Tindale  remain. Humans have dramatically changed the distributions of numerous species for thousands of years, and deciding what is a “natural” range or trying to recreate supposedly “pristine” ecosystems and return them to a mythical state that may have existed prior to human influences are unrealistic goals in a rapidly changing and increasingly cosmopolitan world dominated by novel ecosystems which include intricately intertwined assemblages of both native and non-native species (Boivin et al. Warren  included


People, Parasites, and Plowshares, Columbia University parasitologist Dickson Despommier notes, “These are the most underappreciated of our parasites that have for centuries kept a low profile, cruising just under the radar screen of the world’s health agencies.”Among the parasitic organisms that can transmit infections to humans are about 300 species of helminths (parasitic worms). In his book Onchocerca volvulus and transmitted from bites by black flies; and dracunculiasis, commonly called Guinea worm disease, transmitted by ingestion of water fleas.Helminths of three main groups—cestodes (tapeworms), trematodes , and roundworms (nematodes)—are human parasites responsible for an enormous burden of disease. A number of helminthic infections are designated as neglected tropical diseases. Among those diseases are lymphatic filariasis, caused by threadlike worms spread by mosquitoes; onchocerciasis or river blindness, caused by the parasitic worm Ascaris lumbricoides), whipworms (Trichuris trichiura), and hookworms ―are dubbed the “unholy trinity.” Those helminths infect humans via ingestion of food or water contaminated with soil containing their eggs or larvae or, in the case of hookworms, may infect by direct passage of their larvae through the skin. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, a large portion of the world’s population is infected with one or more of those parasitic worms: 807−1,121 million people with roundworms, 604−795 million with whipworms, and 576−740 million with hookworms.A trio of soil-transmitted helminths—intestinal roundworms , Taenia saginata (beef tapeworm), and Taenia asiatica (Asian tapeworm)—is by eating raw or undercooked pork or beef containing tapeworm cysts. According to the World Health Organization, among those tapeworms, the most debilitating health problems are caused by T. solium.The most common way that humans acquire taeniasis—intestinal infection with tapeworms of the genus Tapeworm Enigma, is one of a number of paintings created by Irish-American biologist and parasitologist William C. Campbell. Campbell studied at Trinity College at the University of Dublin and the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. After graduating, he joined the Merck Institute for Therapeutic Research in New Jersey, where he worked for the next 33 years, also holding adjunct professorships at the University of Pennsylvania, New York Medical College, and Drew University. This month’s cover art, Campbell’s research on ivermectin as an antihelmintic treatment for animals led to the discovery that this agent would also be effective in treating onchocerciasis. As a result, in 2015 half of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded jointly to Campbell and Satoshi Ōmura for their co-discovery of ivermectin, currently widely used against nematode parasites, including the etiologic agents of river blindness, elephantiasis, and strongyloidiasis.  Campbell is also a poet and a painter. His persistent curiosity and extensive knowledge about parasitic worms are apparent in his artistic endeavors. In a 2019 newspaper interview, Campbell explained, “Some people focus on one subject and then have a hobby to sort of escape from their main subject. I don't look at it that way at all. I'm not painting pictures to escape from the science that I do. I want to bring the science with me into the painting and bring the two together.”Tapeworm Enigma exemplifies his surrealistic approach to painting. A moment is needed for the viewer to realize that the segmented strands of green, blue, yellow, and orange that cover the vibrant red background indeed represent tapeworms. A purple rostellum, streaked with white and black, seems disturbingly agile, all too eye-catching. At the bottom left of the painting is the orange segmented body of a Dibothriocephalus latus worm tapering into the unsegmented neck and terminating in its distinctive scolex, with a slit-like groove for attachment to the intestine. The light blue profile of a human face juxtaposed with the dark blue scolex of a T. saginata tapeworm in the center of the painting invariably forces the viewer to pause and contemplate, possibly while also squirming a bit, the parasite–host relationship. en face’ view of the pork tapeworm. Elsewhere are stretches of nondescript tapeworms. Less easily found is a larval stage (hexacanth embryo) of a tapeworm, as well as suggestions of the fish tapeworm of humans.” Campbell  explained that “The painting features the attachment-organ of the beef tapeworm of humans (dark blue and highly textured). Adjacent to it is a human profile that gives way to a tapeworm (light blue) that disintegrates, as tapeworms do, as it gets beyond maturity. In upper left is a stylized ‘Irish America Magazine: “I consider them [parasitic worms] beautiful,” he said. “They are just doing their own thing and not meaning to be destructive. And I have said in some recent papers that the objective is not to get rid of parasitic worms, the objective is to get rid of parasitic diseases.”Exercising his prerogative as an artist, Campbell concludes, “The ‘meaning’ of the picture must remain cryptic!” Perhaps, though, he offered a clue in a 2017 interview in the