The Meat of the Matter: The Effect of Science-based Information on Consumer Perception of Grass-fed Beef

In the United States, there is a growing disconnect between consumers and their food source, leading to a lack of knowledge and trust in the agricultural food system. Urbanization has moved people away from farms, ranches, and food production; and the information consumers seek about their food is filtered through mass and social media. Portrayals of information about food production, specifically beef, from outside the agriculture industry often present polarizing and conflicting information about beef production and its implications for the health and well-being of humans, livestock, and the environment. This adds to consumer confusion and influences purchasing behaviors. Using a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest 2x2 factorial design, we sought to explore consumer (n = 60) perceptions, consumption, and purchasing behaviors of grass-fed beef and determine the effects of four information treatments on overall perception. Descriptive results showed consumers do not have a shared definition pertaining to grass- and grain-fed beef, citing the internet as their most referenced source for information about food and grass-fed beef. Results from a t-test indicated that exposing consumers to an information treatment had a significant effect on environmental impacts, cost, quality/nutrition, and overall perception of grass-fed beef. A between-subjects factorial ANOVA revealed there was no significant difference in perception based on treatment type. Efforts to raise awareness about beef production, on-farm practices, and links between food and grower could be warranted to help enhance the trust and credibility of the industry and bridge the gap between producers and consumers

Exploring Identities of Extension Faculty and Educators as Science Communicators

This research explored the relationship between University of Idaho (UI) Extension educators and faculty’s social identity as science communicators and their most-used communication type. This non-experimental, sequential, mixed-method study with a qualitative priority utilized surveys and interviews to gather data. This paper will focus on the qualitative and mixing components of the study. We used stratified purposive sampling based on location and most used communication type to select participants for interviews and conducted interviews to understand their social identities as science communicators. We identified five main themes: continual development, technology, research dissemination, evaluation for motivation, and community relationships. We employed a cross-case comparison to find relationships between themes and communication type. Science communication identity and communication types have distinct relationships with science communication identity being seen as an adaptable and flexible title. Participants reported diverse motivations for communicating science, but all emphasized their roles in sharing reliable, research-based information with constituents. Participants discussed the value of skill-building and expressed interest in additional training to become more effective science communicators and better meet the needs of the communities they serve. Additional research to understand the constituent perspective is warranted to explore how professionals are using science communication practices to align with the communication preferences of their audiences to achieve intended outcomes. Replicating this study with Extension professionals in other states would provide insight into a national understanding and application of science communication in Extension