AGED 5302 Research proposal

! 1

EXPLORING UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ PERSPECTIVES, EXPERIENCES, INVOLVEMENT, AND BELIEFS ABOUT AGRICULTURAL DIALOGUE ON SOCIAL

MEDIA

By

MICHAEL DALLAS MARLEY, B.S

A Research Proposal

Texas Tech University

December 06, 2014

! 2

CHAPTER I

Introduction

“Agriculture ... is our wisest pursuit, because it will in the end contribute most to real wealth,

good morals & happiness.”

Thomas Jefferson to George Washington

Background and Setting

According to Davis, (2011) rural populations are decreasing due to rural-urban migration.

Agriculture literacy levels are decreasing due to urbanization (Doerfert, 2011). Less than two

percent of Americans are engaged in farming as their primary profession (Vilsack, 2014).

Despite this fact, agriculture continues plays a role in the lives of everyone, whether it is food,

medicine, or clothes (Whitaker & Dyer, 2000). Furthermore, agriculture impacts the government,

the economy, the environment, the global marketplace, and science (Thomson, 1996). The

worldwide population is estimated to grow to approximately 9 billion people by 2050

(Rutherford, 2008). Technological advancements and innovations are the only way farmers and

ranchers will be able to efficiently meet the increased demand (Rutherford, 2008). The

significance and demand for agriculture are becoming increasingly important. (Rutherford,

2008).

Although agricultural production is in high demand, agricultural literacy, or the basic

understanding of agricultural principles, continues to rapidly decline (Doerfert, 2011). The job

of agricultural educators and communicators is to transmit accurate agriculture related

! 3

information between agriculture and nonagricultural stakeholders. Additionally, agricultural

communicators and educators deal with the issues of ethics and image in efforts to transmit

truthful information along with the ideals of the agricultural production and processing

industries.

According to Evans, (2006) the theoretical roots of agriculture related communication are

constantly changing. A majority of Americans are removed from the agriculture industry

(Duncan & Broyles, 2006). Thomson (1996) stated the public is more likely to look to news

sources for information when they have less direct experience regarding any certain issue.

Furthermore, urban populations have little interest in agricultural or rural affairs (Pawlick, 2001).

Agriculture is not high on the agenda for major news media outlets. According to Reisner &

Walter, (1994) when agricultural stories do make the news, they are event based and conflictual.

People have progressively moved toward online media as their source for media

consumption (Yoo & Kim, 2012). People are looking more and more towards Facebook, Twitter,

and YouTube for their news and information. Social media is becoming a more pertinent source

of information. According to PR Newswire, (2014) “41% of 18-34 year olds chose social media

as their preferred news source, after television and news websites.” This would not be a problem

if it were not for the fact that false and invalid information is often disseminated through social

media. In fact, misinformation on social media can even lead to false memory formation (Fenn,

Griffin, Uitvlugt, & Ravizza, 2014). People are being misinformed by anti agricultural

organizations and uninformed individuals due to the fact that social media websites such as

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube allow users to post user-generated content without any means of

verification.

! 4

In my own experience, I have seen a consider amount of friends and peers advocating

misinformation through negativity on social media for and against agricultural and natural

resources industries. I find it discouraging when I see people express negative views and

attitudes towards the industry or by people attempting to “defend” the industry, especially when

they are not properly informed, their views are established on invalid information, or they are

completely ignorant of any knowledge whatsoever. I believe it is imperative that agricultural

educators find better ways to motivate agriculturists on formal methods of assessing and

addressing misinformation online. Ultimately, I would like transparence in and of our industry. I

think educational establishments are an amazing component for teaching and preparing

individuals to advocate agriculture as communicators and educators. Agricultural educational

facilities can better prepare students if they first come to better understand their students and the

characteristics that are important in motivating problem solving.

This is more so a call for duty and responsibility. There are extremists on both ends of the

spectrum supporting and opposing different agricultural industries and procedures. There is a

large gap in knowledge in the middle of the spectrum of people who are blatantly and

unashamedly ignorant. They are blind and easily persuaded in either direction. They make

decisions that are not grounded on logical thinking or knowledge. I believe each side should take

responsibility for the current state of affairs. Misinformation abounds on social media

battlegrounds where people have moved away from advocacy procedures to negativity. Opinions

are being swayed based on which side can present the opposition was worse. When I originally

drafted this research, I believed all who opposed agriculture were victimizing agricultural

communicators. My belief now is that both sides are responsible for acting in ways that do not

! 5

reflect a positive environment for which the ill informed masses could come to find objective

knowledge. I’m afraid that we have all reached a place where achieving an agenda is more

important than actually allowing people to make their own informed decisions.

Statement of the Problem

As agricultural systems become increasingly efficient, there are fewer and fewer

agricultural workers every year (Rutherford, 2008). As populations become increasingly urban

and as rural populations decrease, Americans’ understanding of agriculture will become further

skewed and agricultural literacy levels will continue to suffer (Doerfert, 2011).

Because of the way these sites allow users to post uncensored, user-generated content, it

is easy for false and invalid information to be disseminated (Fenn, et al., 2014) Therefore, many

people are being misinformed by anti-agriculture organizations, as well as uninformed

individuals. As social media continues to evolve and become more pertinent in the lives of

Americans, people are becoming increasingly reliable upon websites such as Facebook, Twitter,

and YouTube as viable sources of information (PR Newswire, 2014).

Agricultural educators and communicators need to be more effective in their social media

presence for advocating agriculture and combating misinformation. The design of this study will

seek to describe and interpret the perspectives, involvement, experiences, and beliefs of students

in the Texas Tech Department of Agricultural Education and Communications concerning

dialogue about agriculture on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Findings from this study will

help to raise questions that warrant further research to advance the conceptualization of social

media in agricultural affairs research. Gaining a better understanding of the participants’

! 6

experiences, perspectives, involvement, and beliefs about agriculture on social media could aid

educators in preparing and motivating students to communicate and advocate agriculture online

more effectively.

! 7

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study is constructed around the situational theory of problem

solving (STOPS) developed by Jeong-Nam Kim & James Grunig in 2011.

! 8

!

Figure 1: Situational Theory of Problem Solving (STOPS)

The situational theory of publics was developed by Grunig in 1997 and is more widely

known, however, STOPS improves upon the situational theory of publics, as it is more

comprehensive and generalized. STOPS utilizes the situational theory of publics’ theoretical

goals and power; however, it also introduces a new independent variable: communicant

activeness in problem solving. Communicant activeness in problem solving consists of behaviors

! 9

that can be observed as passive or active. These are information seeking, information processing,

information forwarding, information sharing, information forefending, and information

permitting. Communicant activeness is greater when situational motivation is greater. To

illuminate communicant activeness in problem solving, STOPS hones the independent variables

in the situational theory of publics. These variables are problem recognition, constraint

recognition, involvement recognition, and referent criterion. This study was especially interested

situational motivation in problem solving, which is a new variable introduced in STOPS (Kim &

Grunig, 2011). The emphasis of the situational theory of problem solving is to identify

characteristics of people who are willing to actively make known their opinions to solve

problems, and the driving force that is motivating them to do so. Figure 1 shows relationships

between the variables.

This theoretical framework is the foundation for analyzing Texas Tech Agricultural

Education and Communications departmental students perspectives, involvement, experiences,

and beliefs about participating in dialogue about agriculture on social media as well possible

factors that motivated or inhibited the students to participate in online dialogue.

Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of this exploratory research is to assess the current perspectives,

experiences, involvement, and beliefs of currently enrolled students in the Department of

Agricultural Education and Communications at Texas Tech University concerning participation

in dialogue about agriculture through social media.

This study was guided by the following research questions:

! 10

1. What are subjects’ current perspectives about their duty and responsibility to the

agricultural industry in the participation of dialogue on social media about

agriculture?

2. What are the subjects’ previous experiences involving agriculture on social media?

3. What are subjects’ current involvements in advocacy of agriculture on social media

websites?

4. What are subjects’ beliefs about the tools needed for agricultural advocacy and the

availability of these tools?

The study’s participants will consist of males and females who are currently seeking a

Bachelor’s degree in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communications at Texas

Tech. Participants will be observed and studied with these research objectives in mind.

Definition of Terms

Advocacy: A phenomenon observed as a result of communicative behavior that is beneficial to

the process of problem solving.

Agricultural Literacy: “A person possessing agricultural literacy would have the capacity to

synthesize, analyze, and communicate basic information about agriculture” (Frick, et al., 1991).

“Possessing knowledge and understanding of the food and fiber system” (Frick, Kahler, &

Miller, 1991).

Department of Agricultural Education and Communications (AEC): An academic department

within the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources that houses two different

degree programs: agricultural communications and interdisciplinary agriculture with a leadership

or teacher certification option.

! 11

Misinformation: Knowledge or information that is invalid, untrue, or not credible. This definition

of misinformation is purposely broad and encompassing as to increase generalizability. For the

purposes of this research, misinformation is non-excluding or limited by the method, purpose, or

result of its dissemination.

Negativity: A phenomenon observed as a result of communicative behavior that is detrimental to

the process of problem solving.

Problem Recognition: “A problem doesn’t exist until we recognize it” (Kim & Grunig, 2011).

Recognition occurs when reality doesn’t align with expectations.

Social Media: For the purposes of this research, social media is all online social networking

communities and websites that allow users to publicly, privately, or anonymously share,

disseminate, or market information, opinions, ideas, audio, video, and other forms of digital

content. All social media have inherent differences in their design, function, audience, purpose,

privacy level, and level of anonymity.

Texas Tech University (TTU): The four-year institution that encompasses the College of

Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. TTU is comprised of 11 academic colleges with

over 33,000 students enrolled in fall of 2013.

Limitations of the Study

The following limitations of this study should be considered:

• Data will be collected from current students in the Department of Agricultural

Education and Communications at Texas Tech University.

• Members of the population may be unwilling to participate.

! 12

• The generalizability or transferability of the findings is limited to TTU

Department of Agricultural Education and Communications.

• Not all participants may have prior experience or attitudes about online dialogue

concerning agriculture.

Basic Assumptions

The following are basic assumptions made about this study:

• Participants will respond to the focus group questions honestly and to the best of

their ability.

• Participants are students currently enrolled at TTU in the Department of

Agricultural Education and Communications.

• Participants to be used in the study will have experiences and prior knowledge

relevant to the purpose of the study.

Significance of the Problem

A society that is agriculturally literate is vital for the continued success of the U.S.

agriculture industry (Igo & Frick, 1999). The American Association of Agricultural Education’s

2011-2015 National Research Agenda (Doerfert, 2011) highlighted the need for public and policy

maker understanding of agriculture and natural resources. An agriculturally illiterate population

of individuals could negatively impact the sustainability of agriculture through public policy,

decreased demand for certain products, and by complicating the furthering of agriculture

production technologies. These problems affect producers’ ability to meet the needs of an ever-

growing population. A sound knowledge of the agriculture industry is necessary for consumers

! 13

due to the fact that they make voting, policy, purchasing, education, and career choices (Doerfert,

2003).

With a more ever present amount of negative information about agriculture being

disseminated online, agriculturists need to understand how to effectively combat this

information. The role of agriculture communicators and educators is constantly evolving and is

becoming as important as ever. The methods used to by parties for and against agricultural

industries and techniques to address perceived problems in online social media environments are

questionable. Negativity is being met with more negativity and misinformation continues to

affect people.

It is important for agriculture to remain relevant to people who are far disconnected from

the setting and processes. Agricultural communicators must be diligent in evaluating current

standing. If we do not know where we currently stand, we cannot expect to accurately and

efficiently move in a positive direction for greater agricultural sustainability. It is vital to

examine our future agricultural educators and communicators’ current perspectives, experiences,

involvements and concerning online dialogue concerning agriculture so that we may properly

prepare them to better advocate agriculture online.

! 14

CHAPTER II

Literature Review

Introduction

My literature review begins with a thorough of review and analysis of the related

literature that has led to the development of this research proposal. I would explain how my

study is relevant to this literature by creating a network of relationships between different

literature and data that provide evidence for my problem statement by revealing gaps in

knowledge and pointing to relevant issues. I would analyze the related research to better place

my research questions in perspective and show that previous research and current knowledge

cannot solve the problem I have presented accurately enough. This will help explain how this

research will effectively add knowledge to the area of agriculture literacy and agriculture on

social media. I will review the research methods, techniques, and concepts of the related

literature to assure that conclusions were warranted, and therefore creating validity for the related

research that I chose. Finally, I will discuss how the theoretical framework shaped the variables/

research questions in my study and how they will be measured/answered.

! 15

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study is based on the situational theory of problem

solving developed by Jeong-Nam Kim & James E. Grunig in 2011. Communicant activeness in

problem solving consists of six subvariables: information seeking, information processing,

information forwarding, information sharing, information forefending, and information

permitting. To explain communicative activeness in problem solving, the situational theory of

problem solving refines four of the situational theory of publics’ independent variables: problem

recognition, constraint recognition, involvement recognition, and referent criterion. However, it

also introduces a new variable: situational motivation in problem solving (Kim & Grunig, 2011).

The situational theory of problem solving focuses on identifying characteristics of people who

are willing to actively make their opinions known to solve problems and their motivations.

This theoretical framework is the foundation for analyzing Texas Tech Agricultural

Education and Communications departmental students perspectives, involvement, and

experiences in concerning agriculture on social media as well possible factors that motivated the

students to share their opinion in these online situations.

Communicant Activeness

Communicative action in problem solving is the dependent variable in this theory.

Communicative activeness is a concept that describes a persons activities regarding information

taking, selecting, and giving as one engages in problem solving (Kim & Grunig, 2011). Each of

these three domains is then further broken down into an active or passive component making for

six communicative behaviors. Kim & Grunig describe them as follows:

! 16

Information seeking (active) and information attending (passive) in the information acquiring domain, information forefending (active) and information permitting (passive) in the information selecting domain, and information forwarding (active) and information sharing (passive) in the information transmitting domain.

This research focuses on the active transmission of information forwarding. Information

forwarding happens when a giver forwards information even if it was not requested; it is a self-

propelled, planned giving of information to others (Kim & Grunig, 2011).

Antecedent Variables & Mediating Variable

Kim & Grunig posit that there are 5 variables that affect the dependent variable,

communicative action. Figure 3 shows how the variables are related. Problem recognition,

constraint recognition, involvement recognition, and referent criterion are antecedent variables.

Situational motivation is a mediating variable.

Problem recognition occurs “when people detect that something should be done about a

situation and stop to think about what to do” (Kim & Grunig, 2011). Problem recognition is the

primary agent but not the only cause of subsequent communicative and cognitive activity in a

problem situation. Involvement recognition is an observed connection between the problem

situation and the self (Kim & Grunig, 2011). Constraint recognition occurs when obstacles in a

situation are perceived that limit one’s ability to solve a problem. Referent criterion is what a

person uses after the recognition of a problem in which they conduct an internal, cognitive search

for prior experience.

Finally, we have situational motivation in problem solving, which is a state of situation-

specific, epistemic and cognitive readiness to make efforts at problem solving (Kim & Grunig,

2011). Kim and Grunig also state that situational motivation increases as a person is able to

! 17

recognize a problem, how the problem relates to him or her, and with the absence of constraints

in doing something about it, as shown in Figure 2.

!

!

Figure 3 illustrates that communicative activeness is positively correlated with situational

motivation, which is affected by problem, involvement and constraint recognition (Kim &

Grunig, 2011). Problem recognition and involvement recognition have a positive correlation with

Problem Recogintion

Involvement Recognition

Constraint Recognition

Situational Motivation


Referrent Criterion

Communicant

Activeness

Figure 2: Factors Affecting Situational Motivation in Communicant Activeness.

Figure 3: Factors Affecting Situational Communicant Activeness in Problem Solving.

! 18

situational motivation; while constraint recognition is negatively correlated with situational

motivation, as can be seen in Figure 3. Furthermore, referent criterion is positively correlated

with communicant activeness (Kim & Grunig, 2011). In simpler terms, situational motivation is

increased when a person is able to recognize a problem and perceive that they are connected to

the problematic situation at hand. When a person recognizes constraints or an obstacle in a

situation limiting their ability to act, their situational motivation decreases.

!

Relation to the Study

The researcher was interested in the situational theory of problem solving because of its

potential ability to identify what motivates agriculturists to participate in dialogue about

agriculture online. The situational theory of problem solving is capable of explaining student’s

current levels of agriculture communicant activeness on social media. Additionally, by using this

theory, antecedent variables of student’s current active (or inactive) communication behaviors

online can be better identified.

Research Questions:


Constraint Recognition

Figure 4: Constraint Recognition and Situational Motivation.

! 19



agriculture?

By exploring student’s perspectives about their current perception of their duty and

responsibility to the agricultural industry to contribute knowledge and participate in dialogue on

social media, the theory can help explain which antecedents are affecting these students’ abilities

to actively communicate. For example, if students are not recognizing the problem of

misinformation on social media, he or she may not see agriculture discourse and advocacy online

as critical. Additionally, by determining subjects’ beliefs about duty and responsibility in the

participation of online dialogue, the theory can help identify which antecedent variable(s) is (are)

most limiting to situational motivation.


By assessing experience, this theory can be used to understand the underlying variables

that caused previous communication behavior. This objective will also help to assess individuals

with referent criterion, narrowing down the list of other possible variables that affect motivation.


websites?

If current levels of involvement of participants can be determined, variables currently

affecting the participants that have lead to their current activeness (or inactiveness) in

communication can be identified.

4. What are subjects’ beliefs about the tools needed for agricultural advocacy online and

the availability of these tools?

! 20

By exploring the opinions about the tools needed for online advocacy and their current

accessibility through the lens of this theory, constraints can be identified that are currently

inhibiting situational motivation.

According to Kim and Grunig, sometimes members of publics need to be stimulated by

practitioners to voluntarily circulate information about problems in which they are interested.

According to the situational theory of problem solving, “information behaviors are most likely to

increase when individuals are motivated because they recognize problems and involvement and

do not feel constrained” (Kim & Grunig, 2011). By reaching the objectives defined in this

research, we can better identify which antecedent factors are currently affecting the participants’

communicant activeness. In this case, educators at Texas Tech could use the results of this study

to prepare better strategies for increasing motivation and enhancing desired information

behaviors (Kim & Grunig, 2011).

CHAPTER III

Methodology

Introduction

! 21

This chapter explains in detail the procedures used to guide the research process. The

topics of focus will include rationale, data collection, participant selection, researcher’s role,

validity and reliability, data analysis, and standards for qualitative rigor.

Rationale

The purpose of this research is to assess the current perspectives, experiences,

involvement, and beliefs of currently enrolled students in the Department of Agricultural

Education and Communications at Texas Tech University concerning participation in dialogue

about agriculture through social media.

This study was guided by the following research questions:



agriculture?



websites?

4. What are subjects’ beliefs about the tools needed for agricultural advocacy and the

availability of these tools?

The study’s participants will consist of males and females who are currently seeking a

Bachelor’s or Master’s degree in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communications

at Texas Tech. Participants will be observed and studied with these research objectives in mind.

Data Collection

! 22

The basic qualitative research method for this study is focus group research. The focus

group will commence in late March 2015. It will take place at a specific location that is yet to be

determined on the campus of Texas Tech University. The focus groups will be semistructured.

The focus groups will center on agriculture as seen through the lens of social media and

agricultural communications. According to Ary, focus groups are effective for helping people

form their own attitudes, beliefs, and choices. Furthermore, the semistructured interview format

allows for the researcher to form questions and ideas about the phenomenon at hand. Because

this research is meant to gain interpretation and is exploratory in nature, a semistructured focus

group interview is the best choice for eliciting rich data.

Selection of Participants

This research will select participants using convenience sampling. Convenience sampling

is choosing a sample for purposes of availability, time, location, or ease of access. The study’s

participants will consist of males and females who are currently seeking a Bachelor’s or Master’s

degree in the Department of Agricultural Education and Communications at Texas Tech. 20

Students’ will be selected based on faculty suggestions in an attempt to represent the diversity of

undergraduate departmental students from all three majors within the college, while still trying to

maintain a level of homogeneity to ensure comfort of all participants to be willing to share

honestly. Convenience sampling fits the needs for the purposes of this study to gain better

understanding on perceptions, experiences, involvement, and beliefs.

The researcher’s role is observer as participant so observation can be made without losing

the ability to participate in guiding discourse in a suitable direction for the exploratory nature of

the research. Since the researcher is acting as instrument, field notes will be scribed in

! 23

conjunction with video recording procedure so that data can be further analyzed at a later date.

According to Ary, field notes are effective in allowing the researcher to describe how things were

perceived as well as reflect to develop cognitive observations and speculate on data analysis.

Video recording makes data collection much more efficient and doesn’t inhibit the researcher to

employ Seidman’s three levels of listening (2006).

“(1) listening to what the participant is saying; (2) listening to the “inner voice,” the unguarded response that is not targeted to an external audience; and (3) listening while remaining aware of process and nonverbal cues.”

Video recordings will allow for transcriptions to be made at a later date that are deeper

and contain data that can help the research find meaning and develop explanations. Video

recordings will be transcribed into thick rich data at a later date into in the research so that the

full context can be understood and the phenomenon can be better understood.

Bracketing

Working as human instrument in this research it is imperative that I make note of my

experiences leave opportunity for threats to validity. As a means to remove bias and assumptions

from data acquisition and analysis, bracketing of the experiences of the researcher is important to

remove bias and ensure that previous experiences and beliefs do not affect the objectivity and

confirmability. My experiences in agriculture have played an important role in the development

of this research. In addition to a commercial goat operation, my family owned a seed company. A

business perspective coupled with a rough idea of lawmaking and political constituency has

made me cognizant of the potential threats to our country’s welfare and sustenance. This

awareness has magnified my view on the importance of agricultural literacy and deepened my

sense of duty and responsibility to this industry.

! 24

Furthermore, a reflective log will be kept to help identify the biases of the researcher.

This log will be referred and written in during data analysis and other points during the process

to help identify bias and make it less likely that biases are not being imposed on the study.

Data Analysis

The research utilizes the data pyramid technique to develop themes that can be further

analyzed to draw conclusions. A data pyramid takes large data pieces and breaks them down into

categories, then fractures categories in into themes. (Ary, 2013). Constant comparative method of

analysis will be employed. The constant comparative method is described by Ary (2013):

“examine each new unit of meaning (topic or concept) to determine its distinctive characteristics. Then you compare categories and group them with similar categories. If there are no similar units of meaning, form a new category. Thus, there is a process of continuous refinement; initial categories may be changed, merged, or omitted; new categories are generated; and new relationships can be discovered.” These two techniques will be sufficient in gaining understanding and meaning from the

data collected.

Standards for Qualitative Rigor

Peer review will be utilized to reach a consensus and to assure that the analysis of the

data reflects the data that was collected to help assure credibility. As stated earlier, a reflective

log will be referred to and written in throughout the process of collection and analysis to control/

limit biases of the researcher.

Thick rich description of the data sets will be made so that the study will have better

transferability. Thick rich descriptions allows for congruence to be seen between the context of

the research already conducted and what is hoped to be conducted next so that the second

researcher can decide if the study would be applicable to the target audience under investigation.

! 25

Narrative analysis from the data will be used to help provide a clearer sense of

transferability. Narrative is not limited to only the conversations between participants, but also

the environment and descriptions of the entire event. It is a verbal picture of drawn to help place

the reader in the midst of the focus group so they may better understand the context of the

research. Furthermore, narrative analysis can help establish credibility as it provides an

opportunity for another researcher to determine if the findings are supported by the narrative

analysis.

Audit trail technique will be applied to help establish confirmability and dependability.

An audit trail is used to keep an audit of the researcher’s thoughts and actions throughout

qualitative research. Since qualitative research generally evolves and develops over time, it is

important for an outside researcher to evaluate the data for fraud or error. In an audit trail, all

choices made regarding theory, methods and analysis are documented so other researchers can

decide if findings from the research are truly grounded in data.

! 26

References

(2014). In TV We (Still) Trust: 73 Percent of Americans Cite Television as Their Preferred and

Most Trusted News Source - Topping Online, Print and Social Media. PR Newswire.

Ary, D; Jacobs, L; Sorensen, C K.; Walker, D. (2013). Introduction to research in education.

Cengage Textbook. Kindle Edition.

Davis, K. (2011). The urbanization of the human population. The City Reader, 2-11.

Doerfert, D. L. (Ed.) (2011). National research agenda: American Association for Agricultural

Education’s research priority areas for 2011-2015. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University,

Department of Agricultural Education and Communications.

Doerfert, D. L. (2003). Agricultural literacy: An assessment of research studies published within

the agricultural education profession. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Western Region

Agricultural Education Research Conference, Portland (Vol. 41).

Duncan, D. W., & Broyles, T. W. (2006). A comparison of student knowledge and perceptions

toward agriculture before and after attending a Governor’s School for Agriculture. NACTA

Journal, 50(1), 16-21.

Evans, J. F. (2006). Roaming the changing theoretical landscape of agricultural communications.

Journal of Applied Communications, 90(1), 16-32.

Fenn, K., Griffin, N., Uitvlugt, M., & Ravizza, S. (2014). The effect of Twitter exposure on false

memory formation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0639-9

Frick, M., Kahler, A., & Miller, W. (1991). A definition and the concepts of agricultural literacy.

Journal of Agricultural Education, 32(2), 49-57, doi:10.5232/jae.1991.02049

! 27

Igo, C., & Frick, M. (1999). A case study assessment of standard and benchmarks for

implementing food and fiber systems literacy. Proceedings of the 18th annual Western Region

Agricultural Education Research Meeting. Corpus Christi, TX.

Kim, J., & Grunig, J. E. (2011). Problem Solving and Communicative Action: A Situational

Theory of Problem Solving. Journal Of Communication, 61(1), 120-149. doi:10.1111/j.

1460-2466.2010.01529.x

Pawlick, T. (2001). The invisible farm: The worldwide decline of farm news and agricultural

journalism training. Burnham Inc, Chicago, Ill.

Reisner, A., & Walter, G. (1994). Agricultural journalists’ assessments of print coverage of

agricultural news. Rural Sociology, 59(3), 525-37.

Rutherford, B. (2008, December 24). Feeding the world one technology at a time. Beef.

Retrieved from http://beefmagazine.com/business/0101-feeding-worldpopulation

Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College

Press.

Thomson, J. S. (1996). Suburbanites’ Perceptions about agriculture: The challenge for

agricultural education. Proceedings of the 23rd National Agricultural Education Research

Meeting, 38-48. Cincinnati, OH.

Vilsack, T. (2014). 2012 Census of agriculture preliminary report. United States Department of

Agriculture. Retrieved from http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/

Preliminary_Report/Full_Report.pdf

http://beefmagazine.com/business/0101-feeding-worldpopulation

! 28

Whitaker, K., & Dyer, J. (2000). Identifying sources of bias in agricultural news reporting.

Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(4), 125-133, doi: 10.5032/jae.2000.04125 .

Yoo, J. H., & Kim, J. (2012). Obesity in the new media: A content analysis of obesity videos on

YouTube. Health Communication, 27(1), 86-97. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2011.569003

Documents

AGED 5302 Research proposal