↓ Skip to main content

Changes in perceptions and motivators that influence the implementation of on-farm Salmonella control measures by pig farmers in England

Overview of attention for article published in Preventive Veterinary Medicine, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Changes in perceptions and motivators that influence the implementation of on-farm Salmonella control measures by pig farmers in England
Published in
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, September 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.09.009
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

This study presents British farmers' perception of, and barriers to, implementing Salmonella control on pig farms. Four farms that had implemented interventions and their 33 close contacts (known to the intervention farmers) took part in interviews before (phase 1) and after (phase 2) intervention trials to assess the difference in perception over time. Their results were compared against those from nine randomly selected control farms. The hypothesis was that farms implementing interventions whether or not successful, would influence their close contacts' opinion over time. Based on a 'pathway to disease control' model, three intrinsic factors known to influence motivation - attitudes, social norms and self-efficacy - were evaluated. Farmers mentioned that successful interventions on a farm would attract their attention. The use of an appropriate communication strategy is therefore recommended to stimulate farmers' intent to implement control measures. Both before and after the intervention trials, all farmers had a positive attitude towards Salmonella control and felt that their peers and authorities were supportive of controlling Salmonella on farms. In phase 2, however, farmers were more likely to want to share the burden of control with other stakeholders along the food chain and their belief in self-efficacy had weakened. Whilst social norms were not associated with an intention to take action on control, a positive attitude towards Salmonella control and a belief in self-efficacy were more likely to result in an intent to control. In phase 2, farmers with an intent to implement an intervention appeared to have a greater, but not significant positive belief in self-efficacy (p=0.108). This study confirmed that farmers recognised their responsibility for controlling Salmonella in pork - even though their confidence in their ability to control Salmonella decreased over time - and believed that responsibility should be shared with the rest of the production chain. It showed that farmers trusted their veterinarian as a source of advice to guide them during the process of implementing change, though an increase in farms' Salmonella seroprevalence score (Zoonosis National Control Programme (ZNCP) score) especially for those with a low ZNCP score was also likely to influence their behaviour. Getting concrete feedback from customers or a tangible benefit from their action was a strong incentive especially for farms with a ZNCP score higher than 50%. The study also revealed a need to validate which measures are effective as farmers did not perceive that the current advised interventions were worth the additional effort.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Master 8 13%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 4 7%
Professor 4 7%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 20 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 18%
Psychology 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 22 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 September 2022.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Preventive Veterinary Medicine
#674
of 2,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,224
of 331,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Preventive Veterinary Medicine
#10
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,257 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.