Zoos have been popular attractions for centuries, providing a place for recreation, social interaction, and education. The beginning of zoos, first called menageries, started in the 14th century, when high society members would display collections of animals for entertainment and to show off their wealth (Parker 2020). These practices were increasingly frowned upon as animal welfare organizations began to form and gain popularity (Villarroya et al. 2024). These organizations called into question the ethics behind animals in captivity for the purpose of entertainment and recreation, and similar groups are still vocal today. As zoological societies first formed in the 1950s and 60s, a shift from  recreation and entertainment as the core purpose of zoos to conservation and research began (Villarroya et al. 2024). Helping to reinforce this shift is the development of accreditation for zoos and aquariums.  Although zoos and aquariums have changed significantly since their establishment, public perception of these institutions is still varied.

             Accreditation is a significant advancement for modern zoos. In the United States, accreditation is awarded by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), which is a nonprofit organization that prioritizes the advancement of zoos in conservation, science, education, and recreation (Association of Zoos and Aquariums). AZA institutions donate millions of dollars to research, conservation, and education programs annually, as they not only care for the animals they house, but also long-term preservation of these species and the public’s knowledge of them (Association of Zoos and Aquariums).

              There are 254 AZA accredited institutions, whose foundations are built upon the prioritization of animal welfare as they engage with 200 million members of the public annually (Association of Zoos and Aquariums). Earning accreditation is not required for a zoo to be in operation, but for those that choose to pursue this distinction, it is a statement of dedication to animal safety and conservation. Of the licensed wildlife exhibitors in the US, less than 10% of them are AZA accredited (Association of Zoos and Aquariums). This is, in part, due to the AZA’s extensive application and multi-day in-person inspection process to fully vet candidates.

            Even with these advancements, public opinions on zoos remain mixed. Many factors contribute to a person’s opinion on these institutions, such as past experience with zoos, opinions on animal welfare, and cultural backgrounds. A study was conducted in New Zealand on this topic, and they found that visitor knowledge, or lack thereof, of the zoo's accreditation and what it entails also played a role in their view on the zoo and the welfare of its animals (Warsaw and Sayers 2020). Since these reasonings vary extensively, understanding the “why” behind them can provide significant insight into public opinion on zoos and help zoos to properly communicate to their visitors and the general public.​

            Stephen R. Kellert defined typology as the way a person views and appreciates wildlife based on emotional and intellectual loci (Kellert 1980). Through these views, individuals can be categorized. In this study, we expect to see moralistic, humanistic, and naturalistic typologies as the majority with strong opinions on zoos. Moralistic individuals are mainly concerned about animal welfare, those with humanistic views tend to see animals as a means of entertainment, and individuals with the naturalistic typology possess an interest in and affection for wildlife in general (Kellert 1980).