Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 134 Document Number: D11401
Notes:
30 pages., Online via website., "Despite the growing use of genetically modified crops over the past 20 years, most Americans say they know only a little about GM foods. And many people appear to hold 'soft' views about the health effects of GM foods, saying they are not sure about whether such foods are better or worse for one's health. ... a majority of Americans perceive disagreement in the scientific community over whether or not GM foods are safe to eat. And, only a minority of Americans perceive scientists as having a strong understanding of the health risks and benefits of GM foods."
Welch, C.H., Jr. (author) and Wilson, Meredith C. (author)
Format:
Research summary
Publication Date:
1951
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D08610
Notes:
Located in Review of Extension Studies, volumes for 1946-1956, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., Summary of a research report, U.S. Extension Service, Washington, D.C. 54 pages.
Studies of the demography of disability in rural America show that non-metropolitan areas have the highest percentage of people with disabilities, including people with severe disabilities. What are the barriers to dissemination of information to rural people with disabilities? This brief article outlines several barriers, including rural isolation, which can create communication barriers when the sources of information are people perceived as "outsiders."
Davies, Jocelyn (author), Maru, Yiheyis T. (author), Walsh, Fiona (author), and Douglas, Josie (author)
Format:
Book chapter
Publication Date:
2017
Published:
International: CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria, Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 18 Document Number: D10512
Notes:
217 pages., Pages 75-97 in Heinz Schandl and Lain Walker (eds.), Social science and sustainability. CSIRO Publishing, Clayton South, Victoria,Australia. 2017. 217 pages
Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, D.C.
Format:
News release
Publication Date:
2006-07-12
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 151 Document Number: C24425
Notes:
Retrieved July 7, 2006, 2 pages., CSPI says authors in several leading medical and science journals fail to disclose financial conflicts of interest and journals fail to enforce disclosure policies.
Via online by keyword search. Open access., Counsel from a biology teacher about the dilemma of helping students and other "non-experts" assess complex subjects. "The citizen must assess the evidence - not the scientific evidence, but the social evidence for credibility. First, can one trust the source of information? ... If that is relatively secure, one can then take the next step 'backwards' to assess the credibility of the expert or person making the claims. Known experts and media with confirmed track records are ideal, of course. But frequently we must settle for indirect evidence. ... For the consumer interested in reliable knowledge, one must find the thread that one can trust. Robust agreement, when available, helps."
5 p., Ari Mwachofi, Ph.D., principal investigator of the research project titled "Developing a Rehabilitation Service Delivery Model for Minority Farmers With Disabilities," describes how personal contact, developing trust with farmers, and collaborating with community leaders enhances his study. The project's purpose is to build an effective model of service delivery to minority farmers who have traditionally been underserved. The study involves farmers from the Lower Mississippi Delta states of Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi.
Online from publication. 5 pages., Summary of a survey among U.S. consumers, performed by Aimpoint Research for The Packer. Findings suggested that the lack of a concrete definition of sustainability points to the need to earn consumers' trust regarding the food industry.
20 pages., via online journal., This article analyses whether different institutional sources of scientific information have an impact on its credibility. Through a population-based survey experiment of a national representative sample of the Spanish public, we measure the credibility that citizens attribute to scientific information on the evolution of CO2 emissions disclosed by different institutional sources (business associations, government, non-government environmental organisations, international bodies and national research institutions). The findings show that an institutional credibility gap exists in science communication. We also investigate the factors accounting for the credibility of the different institutional sources by examining variables related to knowledge, interest, trust, reputation, deference, attitudes, values and personal characteristics. Exploratory regression analyses reveal that identical variables can produce different effects on the credibility of scientific information, depending on the institutional source to which it is attributed.
