Adoption Quotient: A Measure of Multipractice Adoption Behaviour

Abstract

Studies in the adoption of improved farm practices have used various measures. Adoption has been studied both as singlepractice adoption behaviour (Gross, 1949; Gross & Taves, 1952; Hoffer, 1942; Lindstrom, 1958; Ryan & Gross, 1943, 1950; Wilkening, 195ob, 1953) and as multipractice adoption behaviour (Bauder, 1960; Bose, 1961, 1962; Bose & Dasgupta, 1962; Bose, Dasgupta, & Das, 1963; Copp, 1956; Dasgupta, 1963a, 1963b; Duncan & Kreitlow, 1954; Fliegel, 1956; Freeman, 1961; Hoffer, 1942; Marsh & Coleman, 1954a, 1954b, 1954c; Pedersen, 1951; Rahim, 1961; Ramsey, Polson, & Spencer, 1959; Rogers, 1957, 1958, 1961, 1962; Rogers & Burdge, 1962; Rogers & Capener, 1960; Rogers, Havena, & Cartano, 1962; Rogers & Leuthold, 1962; Wilkening, 195oa, 1952). In the former case, the ratio of farmers adopting a practice to the farmers not adopting it has been used as a measure; while in the latter case, the ratio of the number of practices adopted to the number of practices advocated has usually been used as a measure of adoption. In a few cases, the The journal of Applied Behavioral Science time of adoption has also been used (Bose, 1962; Bose, Dasgupta, & Das, 1963; Dasgupta, 1963a, 1963b; Rahim, 1961; Rogers, 1957, 1958, 1961, 1962; Rogers & Burdge, 1962; Rogers & Capener, 1960; Rogers, Havena, & Cartano, 1962; Rogers & Leuthold, 1962). Adoption is complex behaviour. It involves a number of variables. A simple index based on one variable may not give an accurate measure of adoption. This paper presents a new scale for measuring adoption behaviour, taking into account the different variables involved. The final scale was tried in a village in North India, the results of which have been reported (Chattopadhyay & Pareek, 1964a).

Cross-Cultural Research With the Locus of Control Construct

“…The socioeconomic implications of willingness to adopt new practices are obvious in many areas and have been researched extensively with respect to farming practices in India by Pareek and Chattopadhyay (1966) and Pareek (1964, 1967). The socioeconomic implications of willingness to adopt new practices are obvious in many areas and have been researched extensively with respect to farming practices in India by Pareek and Chattopadhyay (1966) and Pareek (1964, 1967).…”

Discriminant Function in a Profile Pattern of Key‐communicators in an Indian Village

“…A measure of the total multi-practice adoption behavior of each individual, indicated by his Adoption Quotient (Pareek and Chattopadhyay, 1966) was recorded, as well as his innovatjve behavior (operationally defined as the extent of a trial of a practice during the first year of its introduction in the community). The two groups (key-communicators and non-communicators) were found to differ significantly at I per cent level on the total adoption behavior, but not on innovativeness .…”

“…Change-proneness was measured by a projective technique described elsewhere (Pareek and Chattopadhyay, 1966). Change-proneness was measured by a projective technique described elsewhere (Pareek and Chattopadhyay, 1966).…”

A. Some Theoretical and Research Orientations to Communication

“…A paper by two Indian social scientists presents a new scale for measuring adoption behavior taking into account the different variables involved. (31) This scale was tested in a village in northern India. The adoption measure is designated as an adoption quotient.…”