King, James W. (author), Rockwell, S. Kay (author), Tate, Thomas G. (author), and Rockwell: Evaluation Specialist, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE; King: Extension Specialist, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE; Tate: Program Analysis Officer, Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1990
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 76 Document Number: C04141
18 pages., Interdisciplinary agricultural research centers are becoming more common at land-grant universities. These centers often use an interdisciplinary approach to address complex science issues. As these centers address agricultural issues that impact society, effective science communication is a necessary activity. However, these centers may face unique barriers or opportunities. This study utilized a qualitative approach to identify the barriers and motivations of interdisciplinary agricultural center directors when communicating about science. Participants identified common science communication challenges, such as time and lack of funding. Funding was also identified as a motivation, as well as factors related to the tenure and promotion process. Recommendations from this work include evaluating the public relations and the effectiveness of science communication from these centers. Future research should also examine the financial structure of interdisciplinary centers to better inform best practices.
27 pages., Research in agricultural communications is not guided by a national research agenda. Therefore, the substantial body of research produced from scholars working in the discipline represents scattered efforts. We conducted a content analysis of journal articles published in the Journal of Applied Communications between 2000 and 2019 to identify the research themes that establish the discipline’s scholarly base. Through an examination of n = 259 journal articles, we identified N = 27 research themes, the most prevalent of which included agriculture and media relations/practices (f = 30; % = 11.58), public perceptions/understanding of agriculture and natural resources (f = 25; % = 9.65), and agricultural communications academic programs and curricula (f = 21; % = 8.11). Then, we used Q methodology to identify viewpoints of agricultural communications scholars (e.g., faculty, graduate students; n = 45) as they relate to perceptions about the importance of research. We identified four dominant viewpoints of scholars in agricultural communications: Message Framing Influencers, Extension-Focused Scholars and Practitioners, Discipline-Conscious Researchers, and Tech-Savvy Scholars. Together, these viewpoints explained 59.43% of the study variance. Although participants who represented each of these groups had unique perspectives, participants generally agreed that public perceptions/understanding of agriculture and natural resources and crisis communications in agricultural communications were important research themes. Likewise, they generally agreed that the role of agricultural communications professional organizations, agricultural communications efforts during historical events, and agritourism were not important research themes.
20 pages., This study was conducted to examine Florida consumers’ stance on legalizing the growing and processing of hemp, recently redefined as an agricultural commodity. Factors were explored that may explain their stance to provide insight into the communication needs in the early stages of the U.S. hemp industry revival. Results indicated that respondents who had more favorable attitudes toward legalizing hemp were also more likely to fall within the category of being overall “for legalizing hemp” when offered a binary choice. Further, attitude toward legalizing hemp was predicted by respondents’ objective knowledge of hemp topics, attitude toward legalizing marijuana, and perceived personal relevance of legalized hemp cultivation and production. A strong association between hemp and marijuana was also observed in both the quantitative and qualitative findings, and respondents indicated some confusion regarding the mind-altering properties of marijuana compared to hemp. As such, a key recommendation is that early communication messages and strategies be tailored toward educating the public on differences in the uses and psychoactive properties of hemp and marijuana. Future research is needed to identify other key messages needed to enhance public understanding of hemp, as well as the best methods of delivering such. Future research should be conducted with other hemp stakeholders, including policymakers, hemp license-holders, and other farmers and industry members to reconcile potential differences in key stakeholder perceptions and enhance the future viability of the industrial hemp market.
