23 pages., via online journal., This article presents a case study of two effective interventions promoting 1% low-fat milk consumption. Developed after extensive formative research and use of the 4Ps marketing mix, the first intervention in 2012, 1% Low-Fat Milk Has Perks!, was a multilevel intervention implemented in the Oklahoma City media market (OKCMM), which covers most of the western portion of the state of Oklahoma. The program evaluation was based on a quasi-experimental comparison-group design that compared milk sales in the OKCMM with the Tulsa media market (TMM) supplemented by a pre- and post-intervention telephone survey of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients. The program evaluation revealed that 1% milk sales significantly increased 15% from before to after the intervention ended in the OKCMM compared to a smaller increase in the TMM. In 2014, the second intervention, Choose 1% Milk: A Healthy Family Choice, was implemented statewide using three experimental conditions. The intervention resulted in a 42.9% statewide increase in 1% milk sales from before to after the intervention ended. In this article, we describe the use of the marketing mix in the planning, implementation, and summative evaluation of both interventions, including strategic decisions that provide insight into efforts to influence behavior at the population level.
Ruth, Taylor K. (author), Rumble, Joy N. (author), Galindo-Gonzalez, Sebastian (author), Lundy, Lisa K. (author), Carter, Hannah S. (author), Folta, Kevin M. (author), and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
The Ohio State University
University of Florida
Association for Communication Excellence
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2019
Published:
United States: New Prairie Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 15 Document Number: D10430
24 pages., Via online journal., Faculty at land-grant universities are expected to engage in some form of Extension, or science communication, as part of the land-grant mission. However, critics have claimed these institutions are out of touch with their stakeholders’ needs and faculty mainly communicate with others in academia. This engagement with a homogenous group reflects the concepts of echo chambers, where people are only exposed to information that aligns with their beliefs and current knowledge and discredit opposing information. An explanatory mixed-methods design was used to understand land-grant faculty’s engagement in echo chambers. A survey was distributed to a census of tenure-track faculty in the University of Florida’s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences to understand respondents’ engagement in echo chambers. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 13 of the survey respondents to further explore their audiences and channels used in science communication to understand their engagement in echo chambers. Survey results indicated faculty did not necessarily participate in echo chambers, but they also did not contribute to an open communication network. However, the interviews found participants were interested in reaching new audiences yet struggled to communicate with stakeholders. The participants also reported wanting to find alternative channels to peer reviewed journals to help disseminate their work. The findings from this study indicated faculty contributed to a type of echo chamber, but rather than viewing their stakeholders’ opinions as false, they simply did not hear the opinions. Agricultural communicators should work with land-grant faculty administrators to identify appropriate audiences and channels for science communication.
20 pages., via online journal., For over 70 years the use of opinion leaders in a two-step communication process has been employed and validated. However, despite the accepted importance of communicating with opinion leaders as a means to cascade information to opinion leaders’ networks of influence there have been few empirical studies specifically examining agricultural and natural resource opinion leader communication channel preferences, particularly from an audience segmentation perspective. The results reported in the study capitalize on previous research data examined from a unique perspective. Specifically, communication channel preferences were analyzed according to opinion leader self-reported demographic categories serving as audience segments. Associations between sex, age, level of employment, level of education and geographical region and communication channel preference were analyzed. The results of the study are descriptive and foundational in nature. Overall, the results indicate a dedicated web page or blog is the most preferred communication channel across all audience segments and conference calls are the least preferred communication channel across the majority of audience segments. The Facebook group communication channel had the most variability between audience segments and the LinkedIn group communicational channel had the largest observed effect sizes among audience segments.
15 pages, This study investigates the existing communication flows in agricultural cooperatives and the means of communication used by these organizations to communicate with their members. The authors
conducted a systematic literature review to address the following questions: How does communication occur in agricultural cooperatives? What means of communication have been adopted by agricultural cooperatives? What are the main theories supporting the analysis of communication issues in these organizations? There is evidence in the literature that inadequate communication between management and cooperative members can be one of the reasons for organizational failure. Inconsistent and ineffective communication can create a disconnect between members and organizations. In addition, communication is an important mechanism capable of improving the commitment of members to the cooperative. Despite this, agricultural cooperatives are slow to incorporate more diverse and
effective means of communication to reach their varied audiences.
16 pages., via online journal., The 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns that Earth’s temperatures may soon reach a tipping point that threatens humanity’s future. Scientists from many disciplines agree that anthropogenic climate change is a serious problem yet many Americans remain skeptical of the existence, causes, and/or severity of climate change. In this article, we review recent research on climate change communication focusing on audience variables and messaging strategies with the goal of providing communication practitioners research-based recommendations for climate change message design. Factors that influence audience acceptance and understanding of climate science include: demographic variables (such as political party affiliation, religious orientation, and geographic location), as well as brief sections on misinformation, and beliefs in pseudoscience. Keys to effectively construct climate messaging are discussed including: framing strategies; reducing psychological distance; emotional appeals; efficacy cues; weight-of-evidence/ weight of expert reporting; inoculation/correcting misinformation; and separating science from conspiracy theories. Evidence-based strategies are critical in giving science communicators the tools they need to bridge the gap between the scientific community and the at-risk public.
