Discussions on how to conserve and provide enough water has become one of the most highly debated issues in modern society. Although many Extension efforts have engaged the public in understanding behavior and attitudes toward water conservation, limited research has focused on understanding how agriculturalists respond to water conservation messages. The goal of this study was to employ the use of a psychophysiological measure to determine what message components elicited increased information processing during exposure to two water conservation videos. When the two videos were compared in total, no significant difference in heart rate was observed. However, a more granular analysis of phasic or short-term periods of heart rate deceleration revealed five segments of increased cognitive resource allocation while viewing the scientific video and three segments during the testimonial evidence video. Finally, self-report data approached statistical significance, with the subjects reporting greater elaboration while viewing the testimonial evidence video compared to the scientific video treatment. These findings provide unique evidence suggesting that farmers and ranchers allocate greater cognitive resources to scientific evidence, on screen graphics, and narrated statistics. Introduction and Literature ReviewGlobally, water is a crucial aspect of human survival impacting modern industry, recreation, and the agricultural food system (Watkins, 2009). Although water may cover more than 70% of the planet, less than three percent is freshwater that may be used for drinking (Adler, 2007).
Educational research surrounding teaching methods and accepted practices is continually needed to improve teaching and teacher preparation programs. The revised Bloom's Taxonomy is often used by teachers in question development. The effectiveness of these questions are often dependent, not on the question alone, but also in how the question is presented. One component of implementing effective questioning is the use of wait-time. Wait-time is the amount of time a teacher waits for a student response after having posed a question. Experts have recommended wait times ranging from three and five seconds in length. The purpose of this study was to utilize a psychophysiological measure of cognitive resource allocation (heart rate) to provide evidence of the magnitude and duration of cognitive engagement elicited after posing questions and to determine an appropriate amount of post-question wait-time needed by undergraduate agricultural education students. Study results suggest that students were cognitively engaged for two to three seconds during the wait-time that followed a question. Additionally, students re-engaged cognitively after eight seconds of wait-time. The results of this study provide unique evidence in assisting teachers with effectively employing wait-time strategies.
The purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of undergraduate agricultural students on the cognitive and emotional processes produced after exposure to low- and high-level questions, as well as the effects of post-question wait-time to determine the benefits of differing lengths of post-question wait-time based on the level of question. Forty students were shown four different treatment videos in this with-in subjects design, with each video being followed by either a low- or high-level question. Following each question, a wait-time period of either five seconds or ten seconds was employed before the subjects were instructed to answer the question. The student perceptions resulted in a difference between low- and high-level questions on question difficulty, variability in cognitive engagement, and positive and negative emotions, as well as a difference on their perceptions of what constituted an adequate amount of post- question wait-time for low- and high-level questions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.