Skip to main content

Table 5 Advisors’ and farmers’ perceptions on the advisor approach preferred by farmersa sorted in descending order based on t ratio for discrepancies; boxplots with quartiles illustrate the distribution of responses

From: Delivering too much, too little or off target—possible consequences of differences in perceptions on agricultural advisory services

Approach Group N Mean SD t ratio p-value
Coaching Advisor 270 5.9 1.0 11.2  < 0.001
Farmer 499 4.8 1.7
Passive Advisor 269 1.5 1.0 11.0  < 0.001
Farmer 486 2.5 1.6
Driven Advisor 270 5.3 1.2 4.8  < 0.001
Farmer 493 4.8 1.6
Proactive Advisor 270 5.6 0.1 4.6  < 0.001
Farmer 493 4.9 1.5
Demanding Advisor 269 3.2 1.5 1.6 0.121
Farmer 488 3.4 1.7
  1. aAdvisors were asked how they thought their approach was perceived and how they wanted it to be perceived, and farmers were asked what kind of approach they wanted from the advisor