Beyond the Glass: Can Aquarium Diving Foster Emotional Connections with Elasmobranchs and the Ocean and Inspire Environmental Care?

Abstract

Human activities significantly contribute to the biodiversity crisis, yet wildlife tourism can promote appreciation for animals and encourage conservation. This study assessed the impact of diving and snorkeling programs at Atlantis Dubai on tourists’ emotional connections with marine life and their conservation attitudes and pro-environmental behavioral intentions. In 2023 and 2024, 346 participants were surveyed before (n = 172) and after (n = 174) their experiences diving and snorkeling with elasmobranchs. Results indicated a notable increase in positive feelings toward sharks and rays, strengthening connections and respect for these creatures. The program positively influenced attitude toward sharks, making participants more inclined to support their protection and foster a deeper connection with the ocean. Although participants’ willingness to recycle improved, overall conservation attitudes and willingness to engage in broader pro-environmental behaviors showed minor change. However, the heightened positive emotions towards sharks resulted in improved perceptions of these animals, stronger conservation attitudes, and a commitment to environmental sustainability. A deeper connection with the ocean reduced fear of sharks. This research suggests that wildlife tourism can facilitate emotional connections with marine life, potentially inspiring conservation action and highlighting the need for targeted strategies to transform these emotional bonds into lasting pro-environmental behaviors.

1. Introduction

1.1. Wildlife Tourism

Wildlife tourism allows people to encounter wild animals in their natural habitat or under human care [1]. It aims to educate visitors about these animals’ challenges and the steps needed to protect them [2]. These encounters can be transformative, offering a deeper understanding and appreciation of animals that most people only see through the media [3]. Touched by these experiences, tourists are more likely to take action to protect the environment and advocate for the animals they observe, contributing to conservation efforts [4]. Engaging in wildlife tourism often evokes feelings of wonder, respect, and even a sense of awe in guests [5]. This fosters empathy and care for the animals, even those traditionally viewed negatively, such as snakes or sharks [6]. For example, participating in shark diving allows people to see these creatures in their natural state, not through the lens of scary media portrayals. This can lead to more positive feelings like respect and a desire to protect them [7].

Feeling connected with nature is crucial to understanding how our actions affect the environment [8]. Wildlife tourism offers a potential solution by strengthening this connection, which can lead to more environmentally friendly behaviors. Parks, zoos, aquaria, and natural history museums might be the only way for many urban residents to experience the natural world, and research has shown changes in visitors’ conservation attitudes and behaviors after wildlife encounters within these contexts [9]. In situ (on-site) wildlife tourism experiences are considered more captivating, thrilling, and life-changing than encountering animals in zoos or aquaria (ex situ) [10]. Additionally, captive wildlife experiences are criticized by animal rights organizations due to potential negative impacts on the well-being of the animals [11]. However, ex situ wildlife tourism is typically less expensive and more accessible than in situ experiences [12]. While in situ tourism can offer unique experiences, human activity can disrupt ecosystems, stress animals, and contribute to habitat degradation [13].

Both in situ and ex situ wildlife tourism can create lasting memories and positively impact guests. However, to ensure this practice is truly sustainable, it must be evaluated whether these experiences effectively change guests’ attitudes and behaviors towards the environment.

1.2. Zoos and Aquaria: Benefits and Challenges

Zoos and aquaria have evolved from mere entertainment venues to vital hubs for scientific research, conservation, and education [14]. These institutions offer controlled environments for studying a diverse range of species, enabling research that would be challenging or impossible in the wild [15]. These institutions actively engage in both ex situ and in situ conservation work. Captive breeding programs for endangered species, animal rescue efforts, habitat protection and restoration, and species reintroduction are all key components of their conservation efforts [16,17]. Zoos and aquaria recognize the interconnectedness of conservation and education, proudly proclaiming their contributions to conservation through interpretation and education [18]. Various methods are employed, including guided tours, school field trips, keeper talks, and information materials. Interactive exhibits encourage guest engagement, fostering knowledge transfer and inspiring admiration for wildlife. Animals in zoos and aquaria serve as environmental ambassadors, promoting respect for life and the environment [19]. Zoos and aquaria offer a unique opportunity to reach a broad audience, including those who may not initially be interested in conservation. These free-choice learning environments allow visitors to learn at their own pace, making the experience enjoyable [20]. Modern zoos and aquaria prioritize animal welfare as much as conservation efforts. Voluntary accreditation and certification programs have been established to promote higher standards of animal well-being [21]. Managers and keepers are requested to ensure captive animals can exhibit their natural behavior in enclosures that resemble their natural habitats, fostering visitors’ positive attitudes towards conservation [22].

While studies suggest that educational initiatives offered by zoos and aquaria can successfully foster public admiration and comprehension of wildlife, controversy and criticism persist. Some studies have questioned the effectiveness of direct animal encounters in enhancing environmental knowledge [23]. Additionally, ethical and welfare concerns have been raised regarding the use of animals as ambassadors, as visitor presence can elicit stress and avoidance behaviors [24]. Zoos and aquaria must balance education, conservation, and animal welfare to motivate visitors to contribute to protecting the natural world [25]. These institutions ought to continuously assess and enhance their practices to ensure they positively impact both the animals in their care and the global environment.

1.3. Emotional Bond with Animals

Zoo and aquarium visits are driven by an innate connection with animals [26]. This connection is reflected in a desire to interact with wildlife and a willingness to pay for zoo experiences [3]. Zoological institutions offer various Animal–Visitor Interactions (AVIs), from drive-throughs to swim-with opportunities [12]. These interactions are thought to enhance the bond between humans and animals, fostering a sense of care and responsibility towards nature [27]. Research indicates that direct encounters with wildlife can increase empathy and support for conservation efforts [28]. Furthermore, Collins et al. [29] found that people are more inclined to support initiatives directly related to animals they have a personal connection with, rather than contribute to broader biodiversity efforts.

Emotion plays a crucial role in learning [3,30]. It influences what is perceived as significant and enhances attention and retention [31]. Research consistently shows that emotions, combined with moral conviction, are strong predictors of behavior, while knowledge alone is insufficient [3]. Humans react to animals differently. On the one hand, the “similarity principle” suggests familiarity, like monkeys, leads to positive reactions [32]. Aesthetics also matter, with attractive animals, like dolphins, drawing more positive attention and conservation support [33]. On the other hand, “repulsive” animals, like snakes or spiders, can trigger negative emotional responses [34]. Fear, influenced by evolution, culture, and social learning, can also shape human attitudes towards animals [34]. For example, sharks are often negatively perceived due to media representations [35].

People’s attitudes towards animals influence their behavior and conservation approaches. For example, fear of sharks can lead to support for lethal control policies, while pride in sharks can lead to opposing such policies [36]. Zoological facilities offer a safe environment to raise awareness of misunderstandings regarding potentially dangerous animals [37]. Psychological theory suggests exposure can improve attitudes [38]. Treatment of animal phobias has involved the use of the fear extinction technique, which includes interaction, such as physical or eye contact, to reduce fear [34]. It has been successful in improving human perception towards uncharismatic animals such as snakes and bats [34,39]. Observing sharks up close in aquaria has had the same result. A study by Pepin-Neff and Wynter [40] found that people who walked through a shark tunnel reported being less afraid of sharks and shark bites. Observing the sharks’ natural behavior lessened fear, likely because it showed they were not actively trying to harm humans. Instead of focusing on the scary “eating machine” stereotype, aquaria display sharks as graceful, awe-inspiring creatures, improving public perception [41].

Zoological facilities have the unique opportunity to transform public perceptions and promote conservation, especially for the most misunderstood species [42]. While powerful, these positive emotions tend to be short-lived, have a small positive effect, and be confined to the zoo/aquarium experience [43,44,45]. Therefore, strategies that extend beyond the initial awe and wonder are needed, encouraging visitors to become active stewards of our planet [46].

1.4. Nature Connectedness

A growing body of empirical research has highlighted the significance of the human–nature connection in explaining pro-environmental behavior [47]. Sustainable consumption, signing petitions for nature protection, and a range of other environmentally important actions, for example, have been associated with a sense of connectedness with nature [48]. Torrejos and Israel [49] showed that nature-relatedness had a greater influence on environmentally friendly actions compared with awareness of environmental consequences, contradicting the belief that environmental awareness alone can drive pro-environmental behavior.

Connectedness with nature refers to an individual’s belief about their involvement with the natural environment [9]. This concept is based on the biophilia hypothesis, proposed by [50]. This hypothesis explains the human inclination to connect with the natural environment, the popularity of outdoor activities, the human fascination with natural landscapes [51], and the benefits on a person’s health, mood, stress levels, and overall well-being and happiness [52]. Sadly, modern populations tend to focus more on technology and material comforts, disconnecting from the natural world. As a result, people are losing contact with nature, including interactions with animals [53]. This disconnection might result in destructive environmental behavior, carelessness, unhappiness, and animal phobia [54]. For example, studies have shown that countries with lower levels of urbanization have a lower prevalence of snake phobias [55]. Instead, the more people are connected to nature, the more mindful they will be of their actions and develop a greater concern for the environment [8].

Research has shown that people can form a strong bond with nature by spending time in it or interacting with it [9]. That is why adults with a strong appreciation for nature usually spend a significant amount of time in nature during their childhood [56]. Ex situ wildlife tourism (zoos and aquaria) aims to enhance people’s connection with nature by creating immersive environments that simulate natural surroundings [57]. The time spent at these facilities can be seen as time spent in nature, therefore positively impacting people’s sense of connectedness [58]. Kleespies et al. [9] showed that even the most basic environmental education program in a zoo, a one-hour guided tour, has the potential to increase visitors’ connection to nature.

In this context, aquaria play a crucial role in linking individuals living in urban settings with the ocean. Public aquaria and oceanaria strategically employ touch pool experiences, diving programs, acrylic tunnels, and magnifying glass tanks to foster a deeper connection with the ocean. According to Zhu [56], half of the visitors to the SeaLife Helsinki Aquarium who entered a bubble tank reported feeling like they were part of the ocean while inside. This is particularly important for people who live far from the coast and do not have access to the sea every day.

Recently, there has been growing concern over the well-being of oceanic environments, and public awareness about the importance of oceans, or ocean literacy [59], has become an essential topic. Pahl et al. [60] discovered that having an emotional connection or passion for the ocean could encourage more sustainable behavior when making purchasing decisions. Nuojua et al. [48] found that packaging recyclability was more important to consumers who strongly connected with the ocean. These findings suggest that having an affection for the ocean is linked to sustainable behaviors. To achieve this goal, ex situ wildlife tourism must create exhibits and experiences that encourage visitors to feel this connection.

1.5. Conservation Attitudes and Pro-Environment Behavioral Intentions

There is a disconnect between people’s awareness of environmental issues and their actions [61]. While we face a growing list of environmental problems, concern does not always translate to environmentally friendly behavior [62]. Traditionally, knowledge has been seen as key to influencing behavior [58]. The “knowledge-deficit model” reflects this idea, that more scientific knowledge automatically leads to stronger support for science and environmentally friendly actions [63]. This model is often used by zoos and other environmental education facilities [64]. However, research suggests it is not enough [63], and psychologists are investigating other factors like motivation, attitudes, values, and beliefs that might influence people’s choices [65].

Pro-environmental behavior, also known as environmental behavior, refers to actions that minimize harm to the environment and promote sustainability [49]. Examples include conserving energy, recycling, and making eco-friendly purchases. People’s environmental attitudes reflect their level of concern and care for the environment [66]. Two major theories explore the connection between these attitudes and how people behave. The Value–Belief–Norm Theory (VBN) suggests attitudes and beliefs strongly influence behavior, and the Theory of Planned Behavior states that intentions, influenced by attitudes, guide behavior [63]. This is especially true when intentions target specific actions, like reducing overfishing, instead of general conservation [67].

Environmental education has been shown to demonstrably improve environmental concerns [68]. Studies have shown that zoos can foster positive attitudes towards wildlife and the environment and positively affect visitors’ environmental concerns [43,44]. However, other research has reported limited effectiveness, especially in translating experiences into conservation actions [11]. Moreover, Mellish et al. [18] found potential weaknesses in how zoo studies are conducted, calling for more robust research designs. For example, many studies rely on participants reporting their feelings only after the visit. While this approach reduces participant burden, it is susceptible to social desirability bias (participants may adjust answers to appear more environmentally conscious) and memory inaccuracies [67]. A stronger approach would involve collecting data both before and after the visit, but this can introduce practice (participants improve on repeated tasks) [67] and priming (exposure to a stimulus influences how a person responds to subsequent stimuli) [18] effects, affecting how visitors interpret/respond to the post-survey. Studies using different participants for pre-visit and post-visit data cannot definitively show cause and effect [67]. Other studies rely on self-reported conservation behavior, which can be inaccurate [18]. Directly observing actions would be ideal but is often impractical. This limitation makes it difficult to definitively link zoo experiences with actual changes in behavior [69].

However, zoos and aquaria can bridge the gap between awareness and action by implementing strategies that encourage visitors to take simple, everyday conservation steps relevant to their lives [70]. Offering on-site conservation activities can offer tangible ways for the public to get involved, potentially leading to long-term behavior changes [71]. Zoos can further increase participation by facilitating these actions through staff and programs rather than relying solely on passive visits [70]. Simple initiatives such as selling sustainably made items in gift shops [72], adding a small donation to admission fees [71], providing tangible takeaway informative material [18], and encouraging visitors to write a personal pledge on a postcard [73], can frame the entire zoo experience around conservation. By measuring the effectiveness of these tools, institutions can gain valuable insights into visitor engagement and refine their conservation education strategies.

1.6. Aim of the Study

This study aimed to assess the impact of visitors’ interactions with wildlife at zoological facilities, with snorkeling and diving in an aquarium as a research case. The study postulated that immersive experiences with wildlife in aquaria tanks would enhance appreciation for the tank inhabitants and create a stronger connection with the ocean. It also postulated that these feelings and emotional bonds would lead to better environmental care and a greater willingness to participate in pro-environmental behaviors. Developing more positive attitudes toward potentially dangerous animals such as sharks and rays, which are often displayed in aquaria, could play a key role in advancing conservation efforts for these less charismatic species. Furthermore, understanding visitor behavior is essential for zoos and aquaria to improve their educational programs and cultivate a more environmentally conscious audience. To reach the aim of the study, the following research questions were formulated:

• Can diving in an aquarium improve positive feelings towards sharks and rays and a positive attitude towards sharks?
• Can diving in an aquarium strengthen the connection between humans and the ocean?
• Can diving in an aquarium enhance participants’ conservation attitudes and pro-environmental behavioral intentions?
• Can the positive feelings towards the tank inhabitants and ocean connectedness lead to more positive conservation attitudes and encourage sustainable behavior?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Site of Study

The study was conducted at the Lost Chamber Aquarium at Atlantis Dubai, a luxurious resort complex located on Dubai’s Palm Jumeirah (Figure 1). The aquarium allows visitors to dive into its main tank, The Ambassador Lagoon, through four different activities: Aquatrek Xtreme, Ultimate Snorkel, Dive Discovery, and Dive Explorer (Figure 2). The Ambassador Lagoon stands ten meters tall and holds 11 million liters of water, housing 65,000 marine animals, including 12 species of sharks and rays. It is the largest open-air aquarium in Africa and the Middle East [74].

2.2. Survey Design

The study followed a quantitative, descriptive, and non-experimental research design, using two structured questionnaire surveys as the measuring instruments to target the diving and snorkeling participants at Atlantis Dubai before and after their experience (pre- and post-interaction surveys). The surveys were administered before and after each guest’s activities at The Ambassador Lagoon. The responses were then compared to see any changes in participants’ feelings towards sharks and rays, their sense of connection with the ocean, their attitudes towards sharks and conservation, and their willingness to adopt more sustainable behaviors.

The pre-and post-interaction surveys were identical (Figure S1), consisting of thirteen questions based on the available literature on the main research topic and adapted to the specific case study [35,36,41,67,73,75,76]. The survey started with demographic questions, including age, gender, nationality, educational background, and previous experiences visiting aquaria and swimming with sharks. Emotions towards sharks and rays, attitudes towards sharks and conservation, and pro-environmental behavioral intentions were evaluated using Likert-type scales ranging from 1 (lowest score) to 5 (highest score). Ocean connectedness was measured with an adjusted version of the Illustrated Inclusion of Nature in Self (IINS) developed by Kleespies et al. [52]. The IINS consists of seven pairs of circles labelled with “me” and “nature,” with varying degrees of overlap. The updated scale replaced the nature circle with an image of a barrier reef, resembling the aquarium tank, and labelled it as “ocean” instead of “nature”. Participants were asked to select the circle that best represented their relationship with the ocean, using a scale from 1 (“complete separation”) to 7 (“complete overlap”).

2.3. Sampling

Sampling was conducted from 3 August 2023 to 28 March 2024 during high and low visitation at the study location. It was coordinated by the first author who trained the Atlantis Dubai diving team in administering the survey. The team consisted of 29 dive instructors responsible for preparing the dive equipment, leading guests during activities, and ensuring their safety. Of these instructors, 22 were specially trained on the appropriate timing and methods for presenting the survey, during the pre-dive briefing for the pre-experience survey and after the activity for the post-experience survey. To control potential bias from practice and priming effects, the study employed different participant groups for pre- and post-experience surveys [33]. Employing distinct participant groups also reduced the influence of the researcher’s presence, minimizing social desirability bias and preventing participant fatigue or boredom due to repeated questioning. Data collection employed a two-week cycle, with pre-activity questionnaires administered one week and post-activity questionnaires administered the following week. This alternating schedule aimed to achieve a representative sample by mitigating potential biases due to seasonal fluctuations in participation. The two-week interval also facilitated logistical coordination with the diving team responsible for survey administration. Sampling occurred every day for the entire duration of the study.

The questionnaire was translated into ten languages and completed digitally using Google Forms software through iPads or QR codes with mobile phones (Figure 3). Pre-interaction participants were invited during the pre-dive briefing, while post-interaction participants were invited immediately following the dive. The survey purpose was justified as a generic internal research project from Atlantis Dubai to avoid any bias during completion. Visitors were informed that no confidential information would be asked for and that they could leave the research at any point. Participants provided verbal consent before completing the survey. To submit the questionnaire, guests were required to fill out all survey sections, which prevented any missing data at the end of the data collection period. The survey took approximately 5 min for guests to complete. The first author stayed nearby to answer questions while maintaining an appropriate distance to avoid pressuring guests.

A pilot test of 48 surveys was conducted to identify any questions needing modification or removal and to test whether the iPad/QR code system was efficient. The questionnaire did not require any further modifications following the pilot test. Around 1770 adults participated in the Ambassador Lagoon activities during the data collection period and the final sample consisted of 346 people including 172 in the pre-experience group and 174 in the post-experience group, with only visitors aged 18 and above considered suitable for the study. This made the sample representative of the whole participant population.

2.4. Data Analysis

Data analysis was conducted using TIBCO Statistica (Version 13.3, 2017). Descriptive statistics included means, standard deviations, standard errors, and frequency tables. Demographic differences between the two samples (pre- and post-experience) were assessed using crosstabulations (Pearson’s χ²) for binary categorical variables, and the Mann–Whitney U test for age, which had a non-normal distribution. To compare the main variables between pre- and post-experience groups, ANCOVA (Analysis of Covariance) was employed, including significantly different demographic variables as covariates.

Confirmatory exploratory factor analyses (CEFA—used to reduce dataset size by identifying relationships between questionnaire items and extracting pre-determined latent factors) and reliability tests (Cronbach’s α) evaluated the validity and internal consistency [77,78] of the following factors: F1 = positive emotions towards sharks, F2 = negative emotions towards sharks, F3 = positive emotions towards rays, F4 = negative emotions towards rays, F5 = positive attitude toward sharks, F6 = negative attitude toward sharks, F7 = conservation attitudes, and F8 = pro-environmental behavioral intentions. These factors were pre-determined based on existing literature cited above in the survey design section.

Spearman’s correlation analysis (r_s) was used to identify significant correlations between questionnaire variables and factors extracted from CEFA. Since correlations within pre- and post-interaction surveys were consistent, the test was conducted on all participants as one group. Multiple (for multiple independent variables) and linear regressions (for single independent variables) were executed using the equation Y = b0 + b1 × 1 + ... + bpXp, where b0 is the value of Y when all dependent variables (X1 through Xp) are equal to zero, and b1 through bp are the estimated regression coefficients [79]. Specifically, the regressions assessed the influence of F1, F3, and the item “ocean connectedness” on F7 and F8, the influence of F1 and “ocean connectedness” on F5, and the influence of “ocean connectedness” on the item “fear of sharks”. Only variables with significant relationships with dependent variables were included as regressors. Multicollinearity among independent variables was excluded after calculating tolerance.

3. Results

The demographic profile of the participants (N = 346, with n = 172 in the pre-experience group and n = 174 in the post-experience group) is displayed in

Table 1. Frequencies of the demographic factors in pre-experience (n = 172) and post-experience (n = 174) groups.

Variable	Pre-Experience Frequency %	Post-Experience Frequency %	Comparison Test
Gender			a χ2 = 5.13, p = 0.02
Female	49%	37%
Male	51%	63%
Age	Mean = 36 Min–max = 18–65 SD = 10.32 SE = 0.79	Mean = 38 Min–max = 18–66 SD = 11.24 SE = 0.85	b U = 14,530, p = 0.64
Highest qualification
School diploma	23%	19%	a χ2 = 0.96, p = 0.33
Tertiary education	77%	81%
Nationality			NA
Europe	49%	53%
Asia	28%	27%
North America	15%	13%
Africa	3%	4%
South America	2%	2%
Australia	2%	2%
Swam with sharks			a χ2 = 7.43, p = 0.01
No	76%	63%
Yes	24%	37%
Aquarium visit			c F = 0.98, p = 0.32
Once a year or less	82.5%	76%
2 to 3 times a year	16%	19%
4 to 6 times a year	1.16%	3%
Once a month or more	0.5%	2%

^a Pearson’s χ² test; ^b Mann–Whitney U test; ^c ANCOVA. SD, Standard Deviation; SE, Standard Error. NA, Not Applicable.

. The sample consisted mainly of people from Europe (approximately half), Asia (almost one-third), and North America. Gender distribution showed balance in the pre-dive group (half male and half female), while the post-dive group exhibited a notable shift, with most visitors being male (Pearson χ² = 5.13, p = 0.02). The participants were, on average, in their late thirties, with no significant differences between the two groups. Most participants possessed tertiary education qualifications (e.g., degree or postgraduate) (over 70%). The majority claimed to never have swum with sharks before their experience, and this proportion was greater within the pre-experience group (Pearson χ² = 7.43, p = 0.01). Given the differences noted, gender and previous experience swimming with sharks were included as covariates in further analyses. ANCOVA revealed no significant difference in aquarium visitation frequency between the groups (F = 0.98, p = 0.32), with around 80% of participants visiting an aquarium once a year or less.

Participants demonstrated high baseline respect, peacefulness, and amusement towards sharks before their experience, coupled with low fear and boredom, while there was neutrality regarding feelings of connection with sharks (

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the main variables and comparisons between pre-experience (n = 172) and post-experience (n = 174) groups (ANCOVA).

Variable	Group	Mean	SD	SE	F	p
Shark Feelings a
Respect	Pre	4.33	0.91	0.07	4.21	0.04
	Post	4.56	0.75	0.06
Peacefulness	Pre	3.70	1.16	0.09	6.10	0.01
	Post	4.04	1.04	0.08
Amusement	Pre	3.53	1.29	0.10	11.36	0.001
	Post	4.00	1.198	0.09
Sense of connection	Pre	3.39	1.23	0.09	5.30	0.02
	Post	3.76	1.22	0.09
Fear	Pre	2.62	1.31	0.10	0.80	0.37
	Post	2.32	1.35	0.10
Boredom	Pre	1.90	1.27	0.10	5.35	0.02
	Post	1.51	1.09	0.08
Ray feelings a
Respect	Pre	4.18	1.06	0.08	5.60	0.02
	Post	4.49	0.77	0.06
Peacefulness	Pre	4.03	1.11	0.08	10.66	0.001
	Post	4.39	0.85	0.06
Amusement	Pre	3.69	1.31	0.10	18.84	<0.001
	Post	4.19	1.01	0.08
Sense of connection	Pre	3.51	1.27	0.10	13.28	<0.001
	Post	4.01	1.11	0.08
Fear	Pre	2.35	1.31	0.10	6.42	0.01
	Post	1.90	1.21	0.09
Boredom	Pre	1.94	1.32	0.10	5.21	0.02
	Post	1.53	1.12	0.08
Attitude towards sharks b
The ocean is better without sharks	Pre	1.83	1.17	0.09	0.05	0.82
	Post	1.68	1.22	0.09
Sharks play an important part in marine ecosystem functioning	Pre	4.37	0.94	0.07	1.55	0.21
	Post	4.60	0.85	0.06
Sharks are dangerous	Pre	3.21	1.13	0.08	0.86	0.36
	Post	2.94	1.20	0.09
Sharks should be protected	Pre	4.41	0.81	0.06	4.36	0.04
	Post	4.62	0.70	0.05
Sharks will bite me when I enter the water	Pre	2.15	1.12	0.08	0.004	0.95
	Post	1.97	1.14	0.09
Ocean connectedness c	Pre	4.72	1.76	0.13	17.60	<0.001
	Post	5.58	1.48	0.11
Attitudes towards conservation b
I would like to do something to protect the environment	Pre	4.32	0.71	0.05	1.97	0.16
	Post	4.41	0.78	0.06
I think human actions have an impact on the environment	Pre	4.52	0.70	0.05	3.10	0.08
	Post	4.67	0.69	0.05
I feel like nothing I do will change problems in other places on the planet	Pre	2.52	1.22	0.09	0.02	0.88
	Post	2.49	1.32	0.10
The conservation of nature is important to me	Pre	4.41	0.74	0.06	1.50	0.22
	Post	4.51	0.84	0.06
Pro-environmental behavioral intentions d
I will participate in beach clean-ups in the future	Pre	3.83	1.06	0.08	2.29	0.13
	Post	3.98	1.03	0.08
I will look for certified logos when I buy fish, even if they are more expensive	Pre	3.89	1.06	0.08	3.38	0.07
	Post	4.13	0.99	0.07
I will recycle my waste more carefully	Pre	4.29	0.88	0.07	5.57	0.02
	Post	4.53	0.70	0.05
I will donate to wildlife charities in the future	Pre	3.88	0.97	0.07	2.06	0.15
	Post	4.03	1.01	0.08
I will talk to others about the importance of addressing marine pollution in the future	Pre	4.08	0.98	0.07	3.81	0.05
	Post	4.30	0.90	0.07

^a 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely; ^b 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree; ^c 1 = strongly disconnected to 7 = strongly connected; ^d 1 = very unlikely to 7 = very likely. SD Standard Deviation; SE Standard Error.

, Figure 4). ANCOVA results illustrated a significant increase in respect, amusement, sense of connection, and peacefulness, and a significant decrease in boredom in the post-experience results (Table 2). Pre-experience participants also reported elevated levels of respect, amusement, and peacefulness towards rays coupled with low boredom and fear (Table 2, Figure 4). ANCOVA results indicated a significant increase in positive feelings and a decrease in boredom and fear after the experience (Table 2).

Most visitors had a positive attitude toward sharks before the experience (Table 2, Figure 5). They agreed that sharks are ecologically important and that it is necessary to protect them. Additionally, they rejected the notion that the ocean would be better off without sharks and expressed minimal concern about the risk of being bitten. However, neutrality remained regarding the perception of sharks as dangerous. ANCOVA results indicated minimal impact following the experience on attitude towards sharks, although support for the statement “Sharks should be protected” significantly increased after the interaction (Table 2).

Connection with the ocean was high in the pre-experience group and significantly enhanced in the post-experience group (Table 2, Figure 6), suggesting the diving experience fostered a positive relation with the ocean environment. Both groups exhibited strong conservation attitudes, agreeing on the importance of protecting the environment and acknowledging human impacts (Table 2, Figure 7). Participants disagreed with the notion that individual actions are ineffective in addressing global issues. The experience did not significantly change the conservation attitudes or pro-environmental behavioral intentions in the post-experience group (Table 2). While overall pro-environmental commitment remained high (Figure 7), only the intention to recycle more carefully significantly increased after the experience (Table 2).

The results of CEFA and reliability tests on the items in the questionnaire are shown in

Table 3. Results of CEFA and reliability tests (Cronbach’s α).

Factor	Factor Loading	Eigenvalue	Variance Explained	Cronbach’s Alpha (α)	Factor Score (Mean ± SD)
F1: Positive emotions towards sharks		2.59	43%	0.80	3.91 ± 0.89
Respect	0.67
Peacefulness	0.85
Amusement	0.78
Sense of connection	0.84
F2: Negative emotions towards sharks		1.37	23%	0.57	2.08 ± 1.06
Fear	−0.81
Boredom	−0.85
F3: Positive emotions towards rays		2.76	46%	0.83	4.06 ± 0.89
Respect	0.81
Peacefulness	0.86
Amusement	0.79
Sense of connection	0.81
F4: Negative emotions towards rays		1.52	25%	0.70	1.93 ± 1.10
Fear	0.87
Boredom	0.88
F5: Positive attitude towards sharks		1.31	26%	0.56	4.50 ± 0.69
Sharks are important	0.81
Sharks protected	0.83
F6: Negative attitudes towards sharks		2.05	41%	0.72	2.29 ± 0.93
Ocean without sharks	−0.73
Sharks are dangerous	−0.80
Sharks will bite	−0.86
F7: Attitudes towards conservation		2.40	60%	0.87	4.47 ± 0.66
Do something	−0.91
Human actions impact	−0.85
Conservation is important	−0.90
F8: Pro-environmental behavioral intentions		3.35	67%	0.87	4.09 ± 0.78
Beach clean-up	−0.79
Sustainable fish	−0.79
Recycling	−0.83
Donations	−0.81
Education	−0.86

SD = Standard Deviation.

. The factors extracted had loadings exceeding the cut-off value of 0.40 in all instances [78]. Cronbach’s alpha (α) values demonstrated factors’ reliability close to or above the threshold of 0.60 established by Nunnally and Bernstein [77]. F7 = Conservation attitudes had good reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.87) only when the item “I feel like nothing I do will change problems in other places on the planet” was removed. Table 3 shows that conservation attitudes (F7), positive attitude towards sharks (F5), positive emotions towards sharks and rays (F1, F3), and pro-environmental behavioral intentions (F8) formed variable groups with high average scores (3.91 to 4.47), while negative emotions towards sharks and rays (F2, F4) and negative attitude towards sharks (F6) formed separate variable groups with low average scores (1.93 to 2.29).

The Spearman correlation (r_s) analysis between all questionnaire variables (Table S1) revealed that female participants were younger, had less experience with sharks, feared them more, and had a weaker connection with the ocean than their male counterparts. Age, education level, and previous aquarium visits were not significantly correlated with the other variables. Individuals who had previously swum with sharks showed less fear and disagreed with negative statements about sharks. Fear of sharks was positively correlated with negative perceptions about them and a weaker connection with the ocean.

Table 4. Nonparametric (Spearman’s r_s) correlation matrix for the main variables included in the study after CEFA. Values in bold indicate statistically significant (p < 0.05) correlation coefficients. A = age (continuous), G = gender (0 = male, 1 = female), ED = education (0 = high school, 1 = tertiary), SW = swam with sharks before (0 = no, 1 = yes), OC = ocean connectedness, AQ = aquarium visit (0 = once a year or less, 1 = 2–3 times a year, 2 = 4–6 times a year, 3 = once a month or more), F1 = positive emotions towards sharks (1 = not at all, to 5 = extremely), F2 = negative emotions towards sharks (1 = not at all, to 5 = extremely), F3 = positive emotions towards rays (1 = not at all, to 5 = extremely), F4 = negative emotions towards rays (1 = not at all, to 5 = extremely), F5 = positive attitude towards sharks (1 = strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree), F6 = negative attitude towards sharks (1 = strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree), F7 = attitudes towards conservation (1 = strongly disagree, to 5 = strongly agree), F8 = pro-environmental behavioral intentions (1 = Very unlikely, to 5 = very likely) (N = 346).

	A	G	ED	SW	AQ	F1	F2	F3	F4	F5	F6	OC	F7	F8
A	1.00
G	−0.27	1.00
ED	0.05	0.12	1.00
SW	0.08	−0.17	−0.04	1.00
AQ	−0.02	−0.03	−0.05	0.09	1.00
F1	−0.05	0.02	−0.07	0.13	0.08	1.00
F2	−0.02	0.15	0.03	−0.26	−0.12	−0.28	1.00
F3	−0.06	0.03	−0.02	0.09	0.03	0.78	−0.19	1.00
F4	0.06	0.09	0.00	−0.16	−0.09	−0.21	0.70	−0.27	1.00
F5	0.00	−0.11	0.02	0.12	0.04	0.26	−0.22	0.28	−0.23	1.00
F6	0.02	0.14	0.06	−0.32	−0.08	−0.21	0.53	−0.15	0.43	−0.27	1.00
OC	0.08	−0.18	−0.13	0.15	0.15	0.83	−0.20	0.30	−0.13	0.24	−0.25	1.00
F7	0.02	0.11	0.05	0.05	0.02	0.35	−0.17	0.33	−0.22	0.45	−0.21	0.29	1.00
F8	0.02	0.10	−0.03	0.11	0.13	0.41	−0.20	0.38	−0.18	0.33	−0.27	0.30	0.55	1.00

shows correlations between the factors extracted from CEFA. The analysis showed that positive emotions towards sharks and rays (F1, F3) were significantly positively correlated with each other and with a positive attitude toward sharks (F5), ocean connectedness, conservation attitudes (F7) and pro-environmental behavioral intentions (F8). Those who felt more connected with the ocean had more positive emotions towards sharks and rays, a better attitude towards sharks and conservation, and a greater willingness to observe pro-environmental behaviors.

Table 5. Results of multiple and linear regression analyses testing: (1) the influence of positive emotions towards sharks and rays and ocean connectedness on F7 = Attitudes towards conservation and F8 = Pro-environmental behavioral intentions, (2) the influence of ocean connectedness and positive emotions towards sharks on F5 = Positive attitude towards sharks and (3) the influence of ocean connectedness on fear of sharks (N = 346).

Outcome Variable	Independent Variable	Regression Coefficient	SE	t-Stat	p
Model 1:
F7: Attitudes towards conservation	F1: Positive emotions towards sharks	0.16	0.08	1.94	0.05
	F3: Positive emotions towards rays	0.06	0.08	0.76	0.44
	Ocean connectedness	0.10	0.05	1.86	0.06
Model 2:
F7: Attitudes towards conservation	F1: Positive emotions towards sharks	0.21	0.05	3.88	<0.001
	Ocean connectedness	0.10	0.05	1.88	0.06
Model 3:
F8: Pro-environmental behavioral intentions	F1: Positive emotions towards sharks	0.18	0.08	2.28	0.02
	F3: Positive emotions towards rays	0.14	0.08	1.82	0.06
	Ocean connectedness	0.15	0.05	2.91	0.003
Model 4:
F5: Positive attitude towards sharks	F1: Positive emotions towards sharks	0.15	0.05	2.78	0.005
	Ocean connectedness	0.12	0.05	2.22	0.02
Model 5:
Fear of sharks	Ocean connectedness	−0.20	0.05	−3.82	<0.001

shows the results of multiple and linear regression analyses to understand the effect of positive emotions towards sharks and rays and ocean connectedness on conservation attitudes and pro-environmental behavioral intentions. Model 1 tested the influence of positive emotions towards sharks and rays (F1, F3) and ocean connectedness on conservation attitude (F7), but since positive emotions towards rays did not have an influence, this factor was removed, and a new model (Model 2) was tested. Tolerance values in Models 2 and 3 ranged between 0.36 and 0.86, above the threshold of 0.2 established by Tabachnick et al. [80]. The models confirmed that positive emotions towards tank inhabitants (especially sharks) and ocean connectedness positively influenced conservation attitudes and pro-environmental behavioral intentions.

Two additional models (Models 4 and 5) evaluated the influence of positive emotions towards sharks (F1) and/or ocean connectedness on positive attitude (F5) and fear regarding sharks. Tolerance for Model 5 (this could not be calculated for Model 4 which had a single independent variable) was 0.86, above the threshold of 0.2 established by Tabachnick et al. [80]. The models confirmed that positive emotions towards sharks coupled with ocean connectedness resulted in a positive attitude towards sharks, and that ocean connectedness reduced fear of sharks.

4. Discussion

Mirroring Atlantis Dubai’s revenue data [81], the survey participants, mainly European, resembled the typical tourists who frequent the resort and participate in the Ambassador Lagoon activities. Age, nationality, education level, and frequency of aquarium visits did not differ significantly between the two surveys, with the only difference in the percentage of women, which was lower in the post-dive group. In this study, gender, age, education level, and aquarium visits were not significantly correlated with visitors’ perceptions, contradicting previous research [52]. Women feared sharks more and felt less connected with the ocean than men. Research suggests women are more likely to report fear of certain animal groups, including bats, spiders, carnivores, and snakes [34]. Sharks also seem to fall into this category [82]. However, this study found that most women had not swam with sharks before, which might explain their fear. This link between lack of experience and fear aligns with psychological theories suggesting exposure can lessen fear [83]. The fact that women also felt less connected with the ocean confirms previous research that found a correlation between animal phobias and a lack of connection with nature [55].

While most participants reported limited aquarium visits or prior shark encounters, the direct interaction with these animals reduced negative perceptions. This highlights the potential of Animal–Visitor Interactions (AVIs) as a powerful tool for zoos and aquaria to advance their conservation efforts [84]. Furthermore, it suggests that immersive-style exhibits, in which the visitor can enter with no physical barrier between themselves and the animal, can be more successful in engaging visitors with a species than traditional stand-and-stare exhibits, confirming previous studies [69].

Aquarium visits were positively correlated with visitors’ connection with the ocean. Studies suggest that spending time in nature and interacting with it fosters a bond with the environment [47]. Visiting an aquarium can be a form of spending time in nature, thus potentially strengthening this connection [9]. This is supported by the study itself, which showed a noticeable increase in visitors’ ocean connectedness after the interactions. While the interactions increased positive emotions like respect, amusement, and a sense of connection with sharks and rays, the fear reduction was only significant for rays. This is likely because participants already had minimal fear of sharks before the activity, since this type of paid animal encounter attracts people with pre-existing interests, potentially resulting in a less noticeable fear reduction [85]. Furthermore, the recent shift in aquaria and media portrayals of sharks, emphasizing their vulnerability through positive messaging, could have fostered a more shark-friendly public [75]. In this study, positive emotions towards sharks and rays seemed to reinforce each other. This suggests that “ambassador animals” do not just raise awareness for their kind in the wild but also cultivate positive associations with the other species sharing their enclosure. Rays might also serve as a “stepping stone” to appreciating sharks and vice versa, as both belong to the elasmobranch subclass.

While participants displayed a greater commitment to protecting sharks and improved recycling habits after the interactions, their overall conservation attitudes remained consistently high in both groups before and after. This finding aligns with previous research conducted in zoological settings that shows zoo visitors already hold strong pro-environmental views and express more concern for environmental issues than the public. Due to this existing high baseline of concern, it can be challenging to see further significant increases in conservation attitudes through environmental education programs alone. This phenomenon is known as the “ceiling effect” [58]. After their experience, guests were willing to recycle their waste more carefully than before, but there were no increased commitments to other pro-environmental initiatives like donating, participating in beach clean-ups, buying responsibly sourced seafood, or educating others. This outcome may be explained by perceived ease of action (concerning recycling), which is a key factor influencing environmental behavior [86].

The study highlights how increased positive feelings towards sharks, fostered by the interactions, along with a stronger connection with the ocean, influenced participants to develop more favorable attitudes towards sharks and conservation and be more open to environmentally friendly practices. The fact that emotions, specifically towards sharks, were more influential than ocean connectedness demonstrates how close interactions with these creatures can be beneficial for their and the ocean’s conservation. The connection with the ocean, however, had an impact in reducing the fear of sharks, which was not affected by the interaction itself. In this study, those who feared sharks perceived them as dangerous animals that intentionally bite people and make the ocean less enjoyable and believed that sharks should not be protected. Therefore, strategies that reduce fear and favor a more positive view of sharks are crucial for their protection [36].

Study Recommendations

The study demonstrates that the Ambassador Lagoon at Atlantis Dubai effectively fosters positive emotions and emotional connections with marine life, potentially cultivating a more conservation-minded audience. However, to maximize its impact on guests’ long-term conservation attitudes and pro-environmental behaviors, several improvements can be made. These improvements can not only apply to the study location but also other aquaria contexts.

Using natural, immersive enclosures: Zoological facilities should create naturalistic exhibits that mimic real ecosystems. This approach not only benefits the welfare of the animals but also improves educational outcomes for visitors. By reconnecting with nature, visitors can develop a deeper appreciation for the environment and the animals within the enclosures. This fosters a broader conservation ethic that goes beyond just focusing on individual species. Providing opportunities for closer interactions, such as scuba diving courses, underwater helmets, and submersible rides, allows people who live far from the sea, cannot afford to visit marine environments in the wild, or have limited swimming skills to build a more immersive connection with marine life.

Fighting the stigma surrounding sharks: Aquariums should, whenever possible and appropriate, promote interactive experiences with species such as sharks and rays. These experiences must be carefully managed, considering the ethical concerns associated with in-water interactions with creatures like dolphins and sharks under human care. It is essential to ensure that these interactions do not lead to increased stress for the animals in the exhibits while also helping to change the perception of sharks as dangerous predators.

Focusing on emotions when facts are unavailable: This research shows that close encounters with animals create a powerful emotional connection, shaping visitors’ attitudes towards environmental issues. Zoological establishments should prioritize experiences that resonate on this emotional level, particularly when traditional educational materials are limited.

Education and Entertainment: Educating visitors about conservation in unconventional locations can be an effective strategy for raising awareness about environmental issues. The Middle East is a prime example, as zoological exhibits can be found in malls, amusement parks, and resorts. This approach allows people whose main goal is to have fun to engage with conservation without feeling pressured to learn. However, these facilities need to conduct regular assessments of their animal welfare and educational programs to ensure that any stress experienced by the animals is minimal and justified by the educational benefits provided to the public.

Enhancing informative materials: Exhibits like the Ambassador Lagoon could improve the guest experience by adding more signage. Freestanding displays or educational stations could be placed along the pathway leading to the dive site. This would offer information and engage guests, allowing them to learn in addition to the physical briefings. It is no longer acceptable to keep wild animals solely for entertainment and profit. Animals under human care serve as ambassadors for their species in the wild and can convey meaningful educational and conservation messages. All exhibits should be designed with this goal in mind.

Strengthening educational messaging: To enhance educational outcomes, zoological facilities providing close encounters with animals should incorporate conservation messages after the interactions. A debriefing session following the encounter can connect the emotional experience to the importance of conservation and promote long-term behavior change.

Introducing in situ conservation activities: To encourage real-world behavior changes, Atlantis Dubai and similar establishments should consider adding in situ conservation activities and takeaway tools. For example, providing a seafood pocket guide for UAE fish species can help guests make sustainable choices during their stay. Additionally, selling souvenirs that support conservation projects can increase engagement. Atlantis Dubai already contributes USD 1 per guest to conservation efforts; allowing guests to choose which project to donate to could deepen their involvement.

Targeting specific audiences: The study suggests that women may feel less connected with the ocean than men. To address this, Atlantis Dubai and other establishments could offer programs specifically designed for women, such as themed events. A collaborative effort between marketing, conservation, education, and revenue teams could design activities targeted toward specific audiences, maximizing the program’s environmental impact.

Enhancing ocean literacy: It is important to ensure that aquaria experiences become a solid part of the efforts to improve ocean literacy among the public, particularly children. Aquaria that do not do this yet should consider strong partnerships with schools to guarantee that the relationship does not stop at school groups visiting the aquarium but extends to include researchers and scientists from the aquarium visiting the schools, the aquarium supporting the development and implementation of ocean literacy in the school curriculum, and promoting work-integrated learning programs and internships welcoming students who are exploring their career options.

5. Conclusions

This research explored whether the diving and snorkeling programs at The Lost Chambers Aquarium in Dubai can create positive feelings and a stronger connection with the ocean among visitors. The study aimed to determine whether these programs lead to guests becoming more invested in marine conservation and taking action to protect the environment. While the interactions did not significantly change visitor perceptions of sharks, their eco-friendly habits, or their overall conservation attitudes, they resulted in a deeper appreciation for the tank inhabitants, even though sharks and rays can be perceived as dangerous. Ocean connectedness increased after the interactions and significantly contributed to reducing the fear of sharks, which was not affected by the experience itself. The positive emotions towards sharks, raised after the activities, led to a more favorable attitude towards these animals and conservation, and increased commitment to pro-environmental actions among participants. While close encounters with animals at aquaria can ignite positive emotions and a bond with the ocean that lays the groundwork for ocean conservation, these powerful feelings can fade quickly. To turn this initial spark into lasting actions, aquaria must use effective messaging and follow-up strategies before the emotions wane.

This study has several limitations that must be considered in the interpretation and generalization of the findings and in planning future research on the impacts of animal encounters in aquaria. The pre-experience and post-experience surveys were conducted with different participants, making it challenging to determine whether changes in emotions and attitudes were directly due to the interaction. Using the same participants would have been preferable, and the study should also have included a control group to guarantee sampling validity; however, these actions were not feasible due to overlapping interaction schedules, which complicated the gathering of consistent samples. These limitations make the study results only partly generalizable, and the study should be considered a pilot to encourage additional work.

The sample in this study was heterogeneous and certainly does not reflect the average of zoo or aquarium visitors in general. Self-selection bias may have affected the quality of the results and their generalizability. Those who are already predisposed to being environmentally conscientious or have an interest in animals would be more inclined to visit zoos and aquaria and participate in dedicated experiences at these establishments. Additionally, the more advanced opportunities (relative to skill) would likely draw from a population of people (e.g., advanced divers) who already have a strong sense of connectedness to the ocean. People who “don’t like the water” or are afraid of water, would probably not participate in snorkeling or diving activities. Additionally, people who go to an aquarium may differ in significant ways from those who do not. Lastly, a “luxury” resort such as Atlantis Dubai may attract different guests than a budget resort, resulting in different perceptions based on socio-demographic status.

While the study shows promise with positive survey results regarding attitudes and intentions, it did not directly measure actual behavior changes. The survey was shortened to minimize guest completion time. Although questions were adapted from relevant research, some were removed for brevity, which may have reduced their effectiveness compared to the original study. Additionally, the question regarding visitors’ willingness to participate in beach cleanups did not have an N/A option, which prevented participants who do not live close to the beach from answering the question properly. Another limitation of the study was using a novel survey tool to measure ocean connectedness, which requires further testing for validity and reliability. We have focused on ocean connectedness rather than assessing general nature connectedness, and we cannot claim that these concepts are entirely independent. While it seems logical to separate them, we first need to explore their similarities and differences. The study used a coral reef picture to measure ocean connectedness, but this only represents one habitat and may not capture familiarity with other marine environments, such as deep-sea habitats. Therefore, we cannot definitively conclude that aquarium experiences enhance overall ocean connectedness. Future research should explore public perceptions of the ocean to develop improved measures of ocean connectedness.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, research into human–animal interaction, like this one, should always adopt a dual perspective. Beyond examining the human emotional experience, studies must prioritize the well-being and perception of the animals involved. This includes understanding how animals perceive the “invasion” of their space and their potential lack of choice in participating in these interactions. Therefore, such studies should be expanded to focus on the animals’ welfare during these interactions, particularly for “ambassador animals” used in educational programs. Organizations like EAZA have dedicated welfare study groups specifically addressing the well-being of animals involved in education and direct visitor interaction, providing valuable resources and guidelines for this crucial area of research. Atlantis Dubai was accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) in 2020 and by the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) in 2021, which means it adheres to strict ethical guidelines regarding the use of animals in educational programs. This ensures that animals are treated appropriately for their species and that the programs are both educational and engaging for the public.