Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33485375›Full record

ArticleJournal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine2021

What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment.

Melise Pessôa Araujo Meireles, Ulysses Paulino de Albuquerque, Patrícia Muniz de Medeiros

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Melise Pessôa Araujo MeirelesLicenciatura em Educação do Campo, Universidade Federal do Piauí- Campus Senador Helvídio Nunes de Barros, Piauí, PI, 6460-7670, Brazil. melisepessoa@yahoo.com.br.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6303-3385
Ulysses Paulino de AlbuquerqueDepartamento de Botânica, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, PE, 50670-901, Brazil.
Patrícia Muniz de MedeirosCentro de Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Rio Largo, AL, 57100-000, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Alagoas · BRUniversidade Federal de Pernambuco · BRUniversidade Federal do Piauí · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe free list, also written "freelist", or "free recall", is an ethnographic method that characterizes the local knowledge of a population about a given cultural domain. However, there is still much to elucidate about the variables that can influence the number of items that participants cite using this technique. This study applied a casual-comparative experimental design to analyze whether 3 months' time, age, and external stimuli influence the similarity of plant free lists applied at different times.

methodsData was collected from 103 farmers from the rural community Alto dos Canutos, in the municipality of Picos, Piauí state, Brazil. Two free lists were conducted at two different times, with an interval of three months between them. Subsequently, the similarity between the first and second free lists of each participant was calculated using the Jaccard Similarity Index. The generalized linear model (GLM) with binomial errors and stepwise approach was used to analyze the effects of age and external stimuli on information collection when comparing free lists applied at different times.

resultsParticipants' age influenced the information that the free lists collected, demonstrating that the older the participants, the lower the similarity among the free lists. Among the external stimuli analyzed, only the presence of third parties influenced the content of the free lists at the time of the interview. However, contrary to expectations, third-party presence positively influenced the similarity of the lists.

conclusionThe results show that the studied variables age and third-party presence can influence the capture of knowledge. These findings warrant future research into the influences' causes and their potential mitigation, e.g., by isolation or by breaking the medicinal plant domain into focused sub-domains and conducting simpler, successive free-lists, which can mitigate memory issues.

Indexed as

EthnobotanyKnowledgeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsBrazilData CollectionFarmersHumansInterviews as TopicLinear ModelsMiddle AgedPlants, MedicinalYoung AdultData collectionEthnobiological methodsEthnobiologyEthnobotanyMedicinal plants

Identifiers

PMID33485375
PMCPMC7824914
OpenAlexW3112167370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.