Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39114009›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Understanding farmers' perceptions on advisory services in Tanzania: Comparative insights from principal component analysis and Q-methodology.

Annette Goodluck, David Jakinda Otieno, Willis Oluoch-Kosura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Annette GoodluckDepartment of Agricultural Economics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053-00625, Kenya.
David Jakinda OtienoDepartment of Agricultural Economics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053-00625, Kenya.
Willis Oluoch-KosuraDepartment of Agricultural Economics, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, P.O. Box 29053-00625, Kenya.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agricultural advisory services help farmers to access farming skills, technologies and agricultural markets. The services are offered by different actors, who all together form the pluralistic advisory service providers. In recent years, pluralistic advisory service providers have emerged in various developing countries including Tanzania. Pluralistic providers have different institutional arrangements and varying levels of effectiveness, which lead farmers to have diverse perceptions towards them. However, the perceptions of farmers on pluralistic advisory services have not been fully documented, making it difficult to gauge the level of acceptance of the diverse services offered. This paper employs principal component analysis (PCA) and Q-methodology to elicit farmers' perceptions on the pluralistic services using samples of 627 and 23 farmers, respectively. Results from both methods showed that pluralistic providers offered diverse services ranging from production to market information. Further, the two approaches provided concurring findings that advisory services offered did not meet farmers' advisory demands. Furthermore, each method served to fill the shortcomings of the other. Therefore, we recommend a complementary application of both approaches rather than treating them as mutually exclusive in the analysis of perceptions.

Indexed as

Agricultural advisory servicesPerceptionsPrincipal component analysisQ-methodologyTanzania

Identifiers

PMID39114009
PMCPMC11304023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.