III.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This part of the thesis deals with the research design, tools and techniques of
scientific investigation employed in the light of objectives of the study. It describes and
clarifies methods for measuring the dependent and independent variables. It includes
sampling procedure for data collection and statistical technique for data analysis. The
methodology adopted for conducting the study is presented as under.

3.1 Area of the study

3.2 Sampling technique

3.3 Research design

3.4 Selection of the variables

3.5 Measurement of the variables

3.6 Measurement of constraints and suggestions

3.7 Construction of interview schedule

3.8 Method of data collection

3.9 Statistical framework for analysis of data

3.10 Conceptual model

3.1 AREA OF THE STUDY

The study was undertaken in Anand district of Gujarat State. A list of the
registered farmers at KVK, Anand, who are receiving the agricultural technologies under
mobile services was taken. The farmers registered at KVK, Anand is the highest in
Sojitra taluka among all eight talukas of Anand district (Anonymous 2017). As such
Sojitra taluka was purposefully selected for the study.

3.2 SELECTION OF RESPONDENTS

Anand district comprises of eight talukas out of which, Sojitra taluka was
purposively selected for the study. A random sampling was adopted for the selection of
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

respondents. The list of registered mobile users in Sojitra taluka was obtained from KVK,
Anand. Out of which 120 smart phone users was selected randomly for the study.

3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN

As stated by Kerlinger (1976), ex-post-facto research design is worthy to be

applied when the independent variables have already acted upon. Keeping in view the
objectives of the study, ex-post-facto research design was applied. Ex-post-facto research
design is a systematic experimental inquiry in which the researcher does not have any
direct control on independent variables.

3.4 SELECTION OF VARIABLES

A list of variables dealt with in the present study was prepared on the basis of
review of literature related to objectives. Further, experts and research committee
members of researcher's. programme were consulted and finally the variables that were
found to be most relevant to the present study were selected. The dependent and
independent variables selected for the study are given below. The views of the farmers
were gathered separately as there was no possibility to assign scores to subjective items
included in this aspect of the study.

3.4.1 Dependent Variable:

I) Smartphone use competence of the farmers

1. Attitude
2. Knowledge
3. Skill
4. Utilization of smartphone for agricultural application

3.4.2 Independent variables

I) Personal variables

1. Age

2. Education

3. Experience in farming
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

II) Economic variables

4. Annual income

5. Size of land holding

III) Social Variables

6. Social participation

7. Extension participation

8. Mass media exposure

IV) Psychological characteristics

9. Scientific orientation

10. Economic motivation

11. Innovative proneness

12. Self confidence

13. Knowledge about computer application

3.5 MEASUREMENT OF THE VARIABLES

3.5.1 Measurement of dependent variable

[Link] Smartphone use competence of the farmers

I) Attitude

In the present study attitude was conceptualized as positive or negative reaction

of farmers of Gujarat towards smart phone uses. To measure this, scale developed by
Shukla and Chauhan (2016) was used. This scale contains 14 statements as shown in
appendix-II. The responses were collected in five continuums for all the statements viz.
strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree and strongly disagree and scores of 5,4,3,2 and
1 were assigned, respectively for the positive statements, while scores of 1,2,3,4 and 5
were assigned for above responses in case of negative statements. To find out total score,
scores of all the statements received by the respondent were summed up. The respondents
were classified in three groups categories viz., unfavorable attitude (below mean score –
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

0.5 SD), neutral attitude (between mean score + 0.5 SD) and favorable attitude (above
mean score + 0.5 SD). Maximum score one could obtain was 70 and minimum could be
14.

II) Knowledge

III) Skill

IV) Utilization of smartphone for agricultural application

?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

3.5.2 Measurement of independent variables

[Link] Age

It was measured based on number of chronological years completed by the

respondents on the date of interview. The respondents based on their age were classified
into three age groups viz. Young (Up to 30 year), Middle (31 to 50 year) and Old aged
(Above 50 year). One score was assigned for each year of their chronological age to
quantify this variable.

[Link] Education

It refers to the formal education obtained by the respondents in terms of their

level of education. According to their level of education they were classified into six
groups viz. illiterate, primary education (up to 7th standard), secondary education (8th to
10th standard), higher secondary education (11th to 12th standard), graduate and post
graduate and scores of 0,1,2,3,4 and 5 were assigned, respectively to compute this
variable.

[Link] Experience in farming

It refers to the number of years of experience in farming by the respondents at

the time of interview. According to their experience, they were classified into following
three groups viz. Low experience (up to 10 years), medium experience (between 11 to 20
years) and high experience (above 20 years) and scores of 1, 2 and 3 were assigned,
respectively to compute this variable.

[Link] Annual income

It refers to the total income obtained annually by the respondent family from
agriculture and other sources. The respondents were classified into five groups, viz. very
low income (up to `1.0 lakh), low income (`1.01 to `2.0 lakh) medium income (`2.01 to
`3.0 lakh), high income (`3.01 to `4.0 lakh) and very high income (above `4.01 lakh).

[Link] Size of land holding

?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

Land holding is an important variable, which determines the economic status

and potentiality of farmers to adopt improved recommended practices. It was measured
based on the hectares of agricultural land owned by the respondent. Based on land
holding respondents were classified in to four groups viz. marginal farmer (up to 1.00
hectare), small land holder (1.01 to 2.00 hectare), medium land holder (2.01 to 3.00
hectares) and large land holder (above 3.01hectare).

[Link] Social Participation

Social participation in the present study was operationalized as the degree to

which an individual was associated with different social organizations either as a member
or its office bearer. It was measured by using scoring procedure, developed by Pareek and
Trivedi (1965) and followed by Vanker (2000) and Sanjay Kumar (2003) with due
modifications. One score was given for having membership in each organization and 2
score for holding position in each organization; whereas, 0 score was given for non-
membership in any organization. The total score obtained by each respondent was
considered for studying the variable. On the basis of total score, the respondents were
grouped into three categories viz. low (below mean – 0.5 S. D.), medium (in between
mean + 0.5 S. D.) and high (above mean + 0.5 S. D.) as used by Vanker (2000).

[Link] Extension Participation

Extension participation is defined as the degree to which an individual

participates in various non-formal extension activities, with a view to obtain new
information, knowledge and skills related to agriculture. It was measured by using
scoring procedure, developed by Siddharaimaiah and Jalihal (1983) and followed by
Bariya (2001) and Sanjay Kumar (2003) with due modifications. One score was given for
participating in each of the extension activity. The respondents were grouped into three
categories viz. low (below mean – 0.5 S. D.), medium (in between mean + 0.5 S. D.) and
high (above mean + 0.5 S. D.).

[Link] Economic Motivation

This was measured with the help of economic motivation scale worked out by
Supe (1969). The scoring and classification procedure was followed as done by Patel
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

(2000), Temker (2000), Christian (2001), Siddhartha (2001), Tukaram (2002), Vaghela
(2002) and Sanjay Kumar (2003) with slight modifications. The scale consisted of six
statements with five positive and one negative. The responses of the respondents were
obtained against each statement in terms of their agreement or disagreement. The positive
and negative statements were scored as under:

Statement Strongly Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly

Disagree
Agree

Positive 5 4 3 2 1

Negative 1 2 3 4 5

Economic motivation score of an individual respondent was the sum of the scores of all
the statements included in the scale. Categories formed on the basis of mean and standard
deviation is as under:

Low level of economic motivation Below mean - 0.5 SD

Medium level of economic motivation Mean + 0.5 SD

High level of economic motivation Above mean + 0.5 SD

[Link] Mass media exposure

This refers to the frequency of reading newspaper and farm magazine, listening
to farm radio broadcast and farm telecast. The frequency of using mass media by the
respondents was measured for each medium in terms of frequency of use as never,
sometimes, occasional and regular and scores of 0, 1, 2 and 3 were given to compute this
variable. The respondents were classified in five groups using arbitrary method of
classification viz. very low (0 to 3.0 score), low (4.0 to 6.0 score), medium (7.0 to 9.0
score), high (10.0 to 12.0 score) and very high (above 12 score) based on total score
received by them for all the media exposure.
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

[Link] Scientific orientation

It is characterized by a belief in science and scientific approach to solve the

problems in farming. In the present study, scientific orientation is conceptualized as a
degree to which a respondent is oriented to use smart phone applications in agriculture.

This variable was quantified by using the scientific orientation scale of Patel
(2009) with some modification. Six statements were included for the present study with
three response categories as ‘agree’ ‘undecided’ and ‘disagree’. For five statements
(except statement No.6) a score of ‘2’ was assigned to ‘agree’ response, a score of ‘1’ for
‘undecided’ and ‘0’ score for ‘disagree’ response. The scoring procedure was reversed in
case of sixth statement because it is a negative statement. The total score ranged from 0
to 12. The criterion of classification followed by Patel (2005) and Patel (2006) was used
to sort the respondents into three categories as under:

Low scientific orientation Below (Mean – SD)

Medium scientific orientation Between (Mean + SD)

High scientific orientation Above (Mean + SD)

[Link] Innovative proneness

It was conceptualized as a socio-psychological orientation of a farmers to get

linked or closely associated with change, adopting innovative ideas and practices.

Prasad (1983) has used innovative proneness scale developed by Feaster (1968)
with modification in scoring pattern. The same procedure was followed in the present
investigation with slight modification to measure this variable. In this scale, eight
statements were included with three response categories as ‘yes’, ‘undecided’ and ‘no’.
For the first four statements, a score of 2 was assigned to ‘yes’ response, a score of 1 for
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

‘undecided’ and ‘0’ score for ‘no’ response. The scoring procedure was reversed in the
case of last four statements. The score ranged from 0 to 16. The criterion of classification
followed by Patel (2005) and Patel (2006) was used to group the respondents into three
categories as under:

Low innovative proneness Below (Mean – SD)

Medium innovative proneness Between (Mean + SD)

High innovative proneness Above (Mean + SD)

[Link] Self confidence

Self-confidence indicates the extent of feeling of farmers own ability and

resourcefulness in carrying out any activity in the smartphone use which he desires to
undertake.

Basavana (1971) developed a scale to measure the self confidence of college

students in inventory form. Prasad (1983) has measured the self confidence of paddy
growers by using 10 items selected independently from the scale of Basavana (1971). In
the present study, 9 items used by Prasad (1983) were suitable and hence the same
procedure was followed to measure self-confidence of smartphone user farmers. The
items were to be answered by the respondents as either ‘yes’ or ‘no’. The ‘no’ response is
given a score of 1 and ‘yes’ response a score of 0 for each of the items except numbers 3,
6 and 9 in which case, the scoring was reversed. The total score for an individual
respondent was obtained by adding all the scores of the statements. The total score
ranged from 0 to 9 for an individual. The criterion of classification followed by Patel
(2005) and Patel (2006) was used to tag the respondents into three categories as under:

Low self confidence Below (Mean – SD)

Medium self confidence Between (Mean + SD)

High self confidence Above (Mean + SD)

?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

[Link] Knowledge of computer operations

Knowledge of computer operations has been defined as procedural

understanding to operate various devices related to computer operations and internet
connectivity. It was practically measured considering knowledge of computer and IT
connected six areas viz. (1) Knowledge of computer’s components (2) Knowledge of
computer software (3) Knowledge about internet communication (4) Knowledge of
internet service providers (5) Knowledge about browser and (6) Knowledge about search
engine. The responses of the respondents were collected in three continuum viz. complete
knowledge, partial knowledge and no knowledge. The scores of 2, 1 and 0 were assigned
for complete knowledge, partial knowledge and no knowledge, respectively. The total
knowledge score for each farmer was obtained by summing up scores of all 14 items in
the six areas obtained by the respondents. The final format of the items included to
measure knowledge is presented in Appendix. Maximum score one could obtain was 28
and minimum 0.

3.6 MEASUREMENT OF CONSTRAINTS AND SUGGESTIONS

The constraints faced by farmers in use of smart phone applications were

obtained from each respondent. To know their degree of importance, respondents were
asked to give their responses in three-point continuum i.e. very important, important and
not important. The score assigned was two, one and zero for very important, important
and not important responses, respectively. Finally, the mean score for each constraint was
calculated for ranking them in terms of its importance. The same procedure was applied
to identify and quantify suggestions of the farmers to overcome constraints faced by them
in use of smart phone.

3.7 CONSTRUCTION OF INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

The interview schedule was constructed in such a manner that all pertinent
aspects in light of the objectives got covered. It is given in Appendix: II. In preparing the
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

interview schedule, the investigator used available literature and also secured guidance
from major guide, advisory committee, staff of department of Extension Education and
other experts of Anand Agricultural University. The interview schedule was pre-tested
with 25 non-sampled respondents and necessary modifications were incorporated in the
final draft of an instrument for data collection.

3.8 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION

A pre-tested Gujarati version interview schedule was developed for data

collection. The farmer who have Smartphone that was interviewed personally at their
home or work place. Before conducting an interview, the aim and objectives of the study
was explained to the farmer in order to get whole hearted response and correct
information from them.

3.9 STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS OF DATA

The data collected through interview schedule from respondents were

processed and tabulated. The following statistical tools were used for interpretation of
data.

3.9.1 Frequency and percentage

Simple comparison was made on the basis of frequency and percentage.

3.9.2 Arithmetic mean

It was obtained by total number of score divided by the total number of

respondents. The mean was calculated by using formula:

X=
∑ Xi
n

Where,

X = Mean
n = Total number of respondents
Xi = Value of the ith respondent

3.9.3 Standard deviation

?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

This technique was used for classification of farmers in the different categories.
It was obtained by the square root of the average of the square deviation from mean by
the following formula:

S.D. =
√ ∑ ( X i −X )2
n−1

Where, S.D. = standard deviation

Xi= Individual score

X
= Mean of the sample

n= Total number of respondents

3.9.4 Coefficient of correlation

Coefficient of correlation was calculated to find out the relationship between

each of the independent variables and dependent variables by employing following
formula.

∑ X∑Y
∑ (XY )− n
r=
√¿¿¿

Where,

r = coefficient of correlation n = Total number of respondents

x = independent variables ∑ = Summation

y = dependent variables

3.9.5 Weightage mean

To find out overall competence of farmers following formula will be used.

Overall Smartphone use competence

= (R1/M1) × W1 + (R2/M2) × W2 +…+(Rn/Mn) × Wn

Where,
?…………………………....……………………………………..…………. Research
Methodology

R1, R2 ….. Rn = Score received by respondents for each indicator

M1, M2 …. Mn = Maximum score one can get for each indicator

W1, W2 …Wn = Weightage score of each indictor received from expert

3.11 CONCEPTUAL MODEL

The conceptual frame work given in the preceding section may be presented
paradigmatically through the model shown in Figure 1 which is tentative and generalized.
The final form of such model has been suggested at the end of this dissertation in the
chapter "summary and conclusion".