**2. Method**

#### **2.1. Sample**

Altogether, 353 students, 180 (51%) boys and 173 (49%) girls, participated in the study. Participating students were from seven different schools, all located in central Slovenia. A total of 158 (44.8%) students attended fourth grade and 195 (55.2%) students attended fifth grade in primary school. The participating students were between 8 and 11 years of age.

#### **2.2. Research design and instrument**

that the educational programme in the Table Mountain National Park (South Africa) had a minimal impact on the learners' environmental knowledge and a reasonable impact on the

Positive Behavioural Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is a general term that refers to positive behavioural interventions and systems used to achieve important behaviour changes and were first developed as an alternative to aversive interventions used with students with significant disabilities [28]. The primary goal of PBIS is to help an individual change his or her behaviour in a desired direction and enjoy improved quality of life [29]. When creating school rules, using wording that describes desired behaviours rather than undesired behaviours is a frequent recommendation [30]. For example, Hardman and Smith [31] and Kostewicz et al. [32] found empirical evidence that positively designed school rules, which communicate to students expected behaviours instead of prohibitions, influence positively on students' school behaviour. They report that highlighting prohibitions directs students' thinking on what they should not do and therefore their focus is more on inappropriate behaviours.

The aim of the research was to determine if and how Slovene students of fourth grade and fifth grade of primary school understand the role pictograms and comic strips displayed on information panels in protected areas plays in their understanding of acceptable and unacceptable human activities in such areas. In addition, their understanding of the concept of

**1.** How do Slovenian primary school students understand the concept of protected areas?

**2.** Do primary school students understand the meaning of pictograms displayed in protected

**3.** Do primary school students who were exposed to pictograms highlighting expected (allowed, recommended) behaviours in the park differ in their understanding of acceptable and unacceptable human activities in such areas in comparison to those students who were exposed to pictograms highlighting prohibited behaviours in the park or to comic strip highlighting allowed and prohibited behaviours in the protected area through storytelling?

Altogether, 353 students, 180 (51%) boys and 173 (49%) girls, participated in the study. Participating students were from seven different schools, all located in central Slovenia. A

pro-environmental attitudes.

346 Selected Studies in Biodiversity

**1.5. The aim and research questions**

protected areas was explored.

areas?

**2. Method**

**2.1. Sample**

The research questions were as follows:

**1.4. Positive behavioural interventions and supports**

The data collection took place from May to October 2015. The anonymous questionnaires were delivered during regular science classes in primary schools. Approval from the school head office was first acquired and if necessary, written parental consents were also gathered. The time given to students to complete the questionnaire was not limited.

Each student answered some demographic questions and wrote down a definition of a protected area in nature. Students' understanding of pictograms, which were to be later on used in the research, was tested. The results were compared with two standards, namely ISO 3864 and ANSI [14]. All used pictograms have reached the required standard of understanding (min. 89.0% and max. 99.1%). For our further analysis, only students' understanding about all pictograms displayed in **Figures 1** and **2** was measured.

This was followed by experimental design consisting of three treatment groups of students (**Figure 1**). Treatment groups of students were exposed to (1) pictograms highlighting allowed (recommended) behaviours in the protected area (positive pictograms), (2) pictograms highlighting prohibited behaviours in the protected area (negative pictograms) *or* (3) a comic strip highlighting allowed and prohibited behaviours in the protected area through storytelling. Students were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups faced with a set of positive pictograms (**Figure 2**), negative pictograms (**Figure 3**), or comic strip (**Figure 4**) and asked to answer two open questions. These two questions asked them to write down an unlimited number of acceptable and unacceptable human behaviours in the Landscape Park Logarska valley where they had seen a set of positive pictograms, negative pictograms, or comic strip displayed (depending on the treatment group students were assigned to). The Landscape Park Logarska valley [33] was used as a realistic example of a protected area in Slovenia. According to the literature review, the contextual information helps to interpret the meaning of a pictogram as introduces its polysemy.

**Figure 1.** Research design and instrument.

**3. Results**

(1.52), respectively.

B

D

**3.1. Students' perception of protected areas**

**3.2. Acceptable behaviours in a protected area**

litter, smoke, scream, pollute)

Students were asked to define a protected area in nature. As presented in **Table 1**, 36.8% of students provided a satisfactory definition of a protected area (category D) that was in line with the definition of the IUCN [16]. Any answer that showed a student's understanding that protected areas are primarily established for nature conservation, plant and animal protection or similar were considered correct. The remaining students mostly only partially defined a protected area; by giving correct examples of protected areas (category C-14.4%) or focusing on rules, describing prohibited and allowed (recommended) human behaviours in protected

Positive Rules Can Lead to Positive Behaviours: Students' Perceptions of Messages…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.71602

349

**Figure 5** presents how many, on average, acceptable human behaviours in protected areas students named in each group according to school year and gender. The treatment group faced with a set of positive pictograms named the highest number of acceptable human behaviours and the group faced with a set of negative pictograms named the lowest number. A three-way between subjects ANOVA showed that the main effects for school year and for all interactions were not significant. The main effect for this group was significant, *F* (2, 326) = 16.769, *p* < 0.001. The effect size was medium, *η<sup>2</sup>* = 0.093. A post hoc Tukey test showed that, with alpha at 0.05, the means for the positive pictograms and negative pictograms, for the positive pictograms and comic strip, and for the negative pictograms and comic strip were significant. Acceptable behaviours score means (and standard deviations) for the positive pictograms, negative pictograms, and comic strip were 4.21 (1.21), 3.09 (1.41), and 3.72 (1.74), respectively (**Figure 5**). The main effect for gender was significant, too, *F* (1, 326) = 14.476, *p* < 0.001. The effect size was small, *η<sup>2</sup>* = 0.043. Acceptable behaviours score means (and standard deviations) for males and females were 3.40 (1.50) and 3.97

**Category Description** *f f* **(%)**

area, an area with plants and animals, and so on. <sup>65</sup> 18.7

was the most common answer. <sup>50</sup> 14.4

105 30.2

128 36.8

<sup>A</sup> Answer is incorrect; for example, it describes city park, safe area, clean area, fenced

<sup>C</sup> Answer describes examples of protected areas, for example, the Triglav National Park

conservation, animal and plant protection in different ways.

Answer describes rules in protected areas, but it does not explicitly mention the purpose of these rules. Majority of mentioned rules are prohibitions (e.g. not allowed to

Answer describes rules and the purpose of protected areas. In the answer, they explicitly expressed at least once that this is an area primarily intended for nature

**Table 1.** Categorization of students' responses to the question asking them to define a protected area in nature.

areas (category B-30.2%). An 18.7% of students responded incorrectly (category A).

**Figure 2.** Positive pictograms used in the experiment.

**Figure 3.** Negative pictograms used in the experiment.

#### **2.3. Data analysis**

Data entry and analysis were conducted using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics). Basic descriptive statistics of numerical variables (mean, standard deviation, frequency and percentage) was employed. The inferential statistical methods used were ANOVA with post hoc Tukey test and partial *η<sup>2</sup>* was calculated for exploring the relationship between treatment groups.

**Figure 4.** Comic strip used in the experiment (translation form Slovene).
