Role of Source Credibility on Persuasion Towards Conservation Farming

Abstract

As much as we like to think that we only rely on the cold, hard facts when making decisions, the truth is that several other outside factors influence our decision. These can include the flashy graphics of an eye-catching advertisement, the mood we are in that day, or even who is communicating the message. This last point is what I was most interested in researching this summer. My project revolved around how source credibility may impact persuasive arguments about adopting conservation farming practices.

Because a lot of land in this region is dedicated to agriculture, it is important to consider how land management practices may impact the surrounding environment. For instance, conservation farming practices like cover crops and grass waterways promote soil integrity, decreasing the runoff of pollutants into the local watershed. Encouraging the adoption of these conservation farming practices can be challenging since many factors influence how persuasive a message is. Focusing on source credibility, I wanted to determine who local farmers find most credible in order to understand how to communicate information about conservation farming practices in the best way possible.

I created a survey containing questions about a variety of groups that may approach farmers about implementing conservation farming practices. These groups included: neighbors/other farmers, farmer-led councils, local conservation groups, county conservation services, state level regulatory agencies, and federal regulatory agencies. The survey asked participants to rate these groups based on familiarity, knowledge about farming practices, trustworthiness, and persuasiveness. I mailed this survey to a random sample of 300 farmers in Dunn and Barron County. A QR code to an identical digital version of the survey was also passed out at the Menomonie farmer’s market.

Data from the twenty-nine surveys that were returned showed that there was a clear divide among the groups. Groups that were more local were rated higher than more distant groups like state and federal regulatory agencies. Of the local groups, neighbors and county conservation services were rated as the most trustworthy and knowledgeable. Additionally, respondents who rated farmer-led councils as trustworthy and knowledgeable tended to report using more conservational farming practices. This may suggest that farmer-led councils are also an important and influential group.

Having this information allows us to better understand how to engage in open communication about conservation farming practices that will benefit everyone in the community. When approaching individuals about adopting conservation farming practices, it is important to emphasize ties to the local community. Additionally, county conservation services, farmer-led councils, and peer farmers should be integral to leading these conservations. Hopefully, this data will lead to open and fruitful conversations that will promote healthier soil and in turn a healthier Red Cedar Watershed.