4 pages., Via online journal., ACE President Elizabeth Gregory North comments on JAC as evidence of the strong research tradition that is alive and well in ACE.
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.
16 pages., Via online journal., Expertise is dynamic, domain specific, and characterized according to an individual’s level of knowledge, experience, and problem-solving ability. Having expertise in the phenomenon under investigation can be used as an indicator of an individual’s aptitude to effectively serve as a coder in a content analysis or as panelist in a Delphi study. The purpose of this study was to assess 10 years of scholarship published in the premier journals of agricultural education and describe the ways researchers in agricultural communications, education, extension, and leadership disciplines who use content analysis and Delphi study methods are describing the qualifications of the people serving as expert coders and panelists. The study findings revealed the majority of researchers publishing in the premier agricultural education journals are not describing the qualifications used in selecting coders or the credentials the coders possess that would make them qualified to code the data in a content analysis. Furthermore, researchers were inconsistent citing literature that supported their selection of content analysis coders and citing literature to support a decision to describe or not to describe coders’ qualifications. However, a description of Delphi study panelists’ qualifications and citations to support why panelists were selected in a Delphi study were present in all of the Delphi studies analyzed over the 10-year period. Based on these findings, it was concluded that ACEEL researchers should include a description of coder credentials to enhance the consistency, transparency, replicability, rigor, and integrity of ACEEL research. Editors and research professionals who perform journal article reviews for the premier agricultural education journals are encouraged to note the exclusion of a description of content analysis coders’ credentials as part of the peer review process.
