Abstract
A review of diffusion projects in the Third World reveals cause for concern about the nature and quality of development messages delivered to the poorest farmers. These farmers often lack the, cognitive and manual skills necessary to make informed and effective decisions about innovations. An examination of the poorest farmers' comprehension of innovations presented by an agricultural extension team in South India found low comprehension and great variability across all farmers. The results of the study suggest a need for a reorientation in the development communication research from a study of overt behavior as the dependent variable to an examination of receiver comprehension of source messages that may be producing that behavior.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allport, G. et al. (1947).The psychology rumor. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Ascroft, J., & Gleason, G. (1981). Breaking bottlenecks in communication.Ceres, 14(2), 36–41.
Ascroft, J., & Gleason, G. (1980).Communication support and integrated rural development in Ghana. Paper presented at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, Acapulco, Mexico.
Ascroft, J. (1973).The overall evaluation of the special rural development programme (Occasional Paper No. 8). Nairobi, Kenya: University of Nairobi, Institute for Development Studies.
Ascroft, J. et al. (1971).The Tetu extension pilot project. Strategies for improving rural welfare (Occasional Paper No. 4). Nairobi, Kenya: University of Nairobi, Institute for Development Studies.
Benor, D., & Harrison, J., (1977).Agricultural extension: The training and visit system. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Diaz-Bordenave, J. (1976). Communication of agricultural innovations in Latin America. In E.M. Rogers (Ed.),Communication and development: Critical perspectives (pp. 43–62). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Gaur, R.A. (1981). “Transfer of Technology: A Tool for Modernizing Agriculture.” Inmanagement of transfer of farm technology (pp. 103–105). Hyderabad, India: National Institute of Rural Development.
Golding, P. (1974). Media role in national development: Critique of a theoretical orthodoxy.Journal of Communication, 24(3), 39–53.
Government of Andhra Pradesh, India. (1983).Intensive agricultural extension in the command areas: The training and visit system. Hyderabad, India:, I.U. and C.A.D. Department.
Hedebro, G. (1982).Communication and social change in developing nations. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Hong, P. (1981). The joint farming operation in Taiwan: A new approach to effective co-operative food production. In B.R. Crouch & S. Chamala (Eds.),Education and rural development (pp. 87–108). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Johnson, C. et al. (1979).Kitale maize: The limits of success. Washington, DC: USAID.
Kumar, K. (1981). Technology transfer in Indian agriculture: Process and problems. InManagement of transfer of farm technology (pp. 106–116). Hyderabad, India: National Institute of Rural Development.
McAnany, E.G. (1980). The role of information in communicating with the rural poor: Some reflections. In E. McAnany (Ed.),Communications in the rural third world (pp. 3–18). New York: Praeger.
Nandapurkar, G.G., & Kulkarni, R.R. (1983).Training and visit system: Some observations and suggestions. Paper presented at the workshop on Management of Transfer of Farm Technology under the T&V System, Hyderabad, India.
Neurath, P. (1976). Types of surveys. In G. Hursh-Cesar & P. Roy (Eds.),Third world news (pp. 91–140). New Delhi: Macmillan.
Reddy, S.V., Rao, B.V.S., & Praveena. (1983).Intensive agricultural extension system: A critical analysis. Paper presented at the workshop on Management of Transfer of Farm Technology Under the T&V System, Hyderabad, India.
Rogers, E.M. (1969).Modernization among peasants. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Rogters, E.M. (1976). Where are we in understanding the diffusion of innovations? In Schramm & Lerner (Eds.),Communication and change (pp. 204–222). Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.
Rogers, E.M. (1983).Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York: Free Press.
Rogers, E.M., & Adhikarya, R. (1979) Diffusion of innovations: An up-to-date review and commentary. In Nimmo (Ed.),Communication year book 3 (pp. 67–81). New Jersey: International Communication Association.
Rogers, E.M., & Kincaid, D.L. (1981)Communication networks: Toward a new paradigm for research. New York: The Free Press.
Roling, N. Ascroft, J., & Chege, F. (1976). The diffusion of innovations and the issue of equity in rural development. In E.M. Rogers (Ed.),Communication and development: Critical perspectives (pp. 63–78). Beverly Hills. Sage Publications.
Shingi, P.M., & Mody, B. (1976). The communications effect gap. In E.M. Rogers (Ed.),Communication and development: Critical perspectives (pp. 79–98). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Singh, Y.P. (1981). Problems in transfer of agricultural technology. InManagement of transfer of farm technology (pp. 49–68). Hyderabad, India: National Institute of Rural Development.
Tichenor, P.J. et al. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge.Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 159–170.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Srinivas R. Melkote is assistant professor in the School of Mass Communication at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. He received his PhD in 1984 from the University of Iowa. His research interests are in, the area of communication and development in the Third World.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Melkote, S.R. Revealing communication constraints in extension communication strategies. Knowledge in Society 1, 42–57 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02687212
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02687212