Human-wildlife relationships have an important influence in economic, health, safety, tourism, and environmental sustainability. Wildlife management are predominantly guided by natural sciences. Yet, some of the management solutions are not reflecting the concern of the society. Therefore, engaging with the human dimensions of wildlife – understanding individuals’ values, feelings, and perceptions of risk related with wildlife – is necessary. This research addresses three psychological concepts namely wildlife value orientations (cognition), valence towards wildlife (emotion), and wildlife risk perception to understand Malaysians responses towards wildlife. Both interview and survey methods were used to answer the research questions. Results indicate that management interventions that are harmful to wildlife (lethal control) were less accepted or supported than intervention that are good to wildlife (conservation). Moreover, study also revealed that cognitions are good predictors of responses to interventions that is harmful to wildlife while emotions are good predictors of interventions that is good for wildlife.