Minutes of NC-222
Project/ Activity
Number: NC-222
Project/ Activity Title: Impact of Technology on Rural Consumer
Access to Food and Fiber Products
Period Covered: October 1, 1998 – September 30, 2003
Date of This Report: October 31, 2002
Annual Meeting Date: October 10-11, 2002
Members in Attendance: University of Illinois - Hilda Lakner
Iowa State University - Mary Lynn Damhorst,
Eastern Michigan University - Susan Gregory
University of Minnesota - Kim Johnson
University of Nebraska - Diane Vigna
North Dakota State University - Holly Bastow-Shoop and
Linda Manikowske
The Ohio State University - Sharron Lennon
South Dakota State University - Nancy Lyons
University of Tennessee - Laura Jolly
University of Wisconsin - Cynthia Jasper
Gary Lemme, Michigan State University, Advisor
Members Absent: Sherri Lokken, Karen Hyllegard, Julianne Trautman, Rita Kean, David L. Darling, Fayrene Hamouz, David Henderson, Antigone Kotsiopulos, Larry Leistritz, Daryl Lund, Kathleen Rees, Marge Sanik, Kenneth Stone, Thomas Tate, and Norma Turok
Guests: Jay Yoo, University of Minnesota
Mary Lynn Damhorst opened the meeting at 1:00 pm CDT.
Adopted Agenda:
Gary Lemme – USDA Update
NC-222 Annual research Activity Accomplishments Report
Oral reports by state
Resources for 2002-2003 by state
Committee Updates
Membership
Work in progress
Issues/ Concerns
Adopted Agenda
(cont.)
Discussion of Panel Survey Follow-up
Plans and time schedule
Response to participants
Assign duties for Termination or Continuation Report
Refinement of panel survey follow-up questionnaire
Committee work
Conference presentations
Manuscript development
Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting:
The minutes of last year’s meeting were reviewed by members and approved.
Key Discussions:
Gary Lemme gave an update on the federal budget. There may not be a federal budget passed until after the election in November. There will be an increase in NRI this coming year.
Dr. Lemme outlined the new format for entering minutes on the computer. The new system will automatically send you notices of meetings, etc. This system is what we will be using to write our next proposal.
This is the last year of our five-year project – it ends Sept. 30, 2003. We need to decide what we want to do in the future. This project terminates regardless. We can apply for a new project number for a new proposal. The layout of the new format was provided. We need to be multi-disciplinary and multi-functional in order to be considered for funding.
State reports are needed by November 15, 2002. They must be sent to Karen Hyllegard.
Resources for
2002-2003 by State:
NC-222 has $7,000 + left to spend. Ohio can access $1500.00 if we need it. Tennessee can possibly provide funding if
needed. Each state will seek funding to
support the project if needed. Minnesota has a Research Assistant (25%) and
$500. Iowa has three Research
Assistants and can provide cash if needed.
Colorado has a half-time assistantship.
Wisconsin has project assistant time.
Eastern Michigan has a Graduate Assistant.
Committee Updates:
Publications: Kim Johnson
reported that no new proposals have been submitted. NC 222 Committee members were encouraged to
continue to submit proposals for papers to the publication committee. Also make
sure that Kim Johnson is sent the actual paper when it is prepared. The overall group then discussed the papers
that were proposed at the last annual meeting.
(See Publications – Appendix B)
The Future of
NC-222:
Mary Lynn Damhorst indicated that
if this committee continues, it might need to take a new focus and have a
strong practical application for rural business or rural consumers. Perhaps we could take this knowledge of what
consumers are doing and share it with businesses so that they know how to be
successful.
Laura recalled the NC 192 focus
groups done in communities. This
regional research project studied rural retailers and rural consumers and
developed a financial profile of high, medium, and low profit firms.
Other ideas discussed:
Do we know what rural business
needs to succeed? A current needs
assessment may be a possibility. Some
work has been done by the Small Stores Institute (Norma Turok, Illinois) and we
need to find out what point this group is at.
How can we use what we have learned from NC 222 to create a new project
that may help small business?
Friday, October 11, 2002
Gary Lemme inquired about applying
for a one-year extension of this project and we will be able to make this
application. We have a good reason for
requesting this given the longitudinal study.
This will allow us to collect the additional data for the longitudinal
study and finish the manuscripts we have started and proposed. The application for extension needs to be
made within a month of the Annual Meeting.
Panel Survey
Follow-up Discussion:
The committee discussed the panel
survey follow-up. Notes regarding this
discussion can be found in Appendix C.
Proposal to
Extend the Project for One Year:
The committee went through each
objective of the current project to see what has been accomplished, what is
left to do, and what we will plan to do in a one-year extension.
Website for NC-222:
Sharon Lennon volunteered to look into a website where we
could share working drafts of papers as PDF files. If this is possible, we would then send papers to Sharron to have
them put on the website. Mary Lynn
Damhorst will create another list serve for authors so that it goes to the
working group of this committee.
Manuscript Subcommittees:
Individual author groups met to discuss development and
progress on manuscripts.
Assigned Responsibilities / Deadlines/ Target dates:
1. Preparing the Extension
Application – Sharron Lennon volunteered to chair this committee. Kim Johnson will assist in preparing this
document.
2. Holly Bastow-Shoop volunteered
to be chair of this group starting October 1, 2003. The dates of the Annual Meeting will be October 9-10, 2003 and
the site may be Homewood Suites by Hilton, Mall of America if we are able to
negotiate a good room rate. This is all
pending the approval of the extension.
Linda Manikowske agreed to make the hotel arrangements for the meeting.
Signatures:
_____________________________________
Chairperson/ Date
_____________________________________
Administrative Advisor/ Date
Appendix A
State Reports –
NC-222 – 2001-2002
Tennessee: Laura Jolly reported that a master’s thesis
national and state level presentation.
Tennessee will continue to work on two of the NC-222 planned
manuscripts.
North Dakota: Linda
Manikowske and Holly Bastow-Shoop have been working with state data for
publication. We will continue to work
with the next round of data collection and on manuscripts.
South Dakota: Nancy
Lyons reported that South Dakota shared findings of the South Dakota date
through a Fact Sheet shared with FCS Agents and to some community Chamber of
Commerces. A presentation incorporating
SD data and findings from analysis of retail websites was given to a statewide
conference – “Innovations: Educating
New Generations.” Continuing to work on
manuscripts and the next round of data collection.
Minnesota: Kim
Johnson reported that Minnesota has worked on the submission of a paper
testing Rogers innovation theory. Reviews have been received and after
revision the paper will be published in the Clothing and Textiles Research
Journal.
Ohio:
Sharron Lennon worked with Kim Johnson to resubmit the NRI Proposal,
which was ultimately rejected. One
master’s student is doing a thesis supporting the work of NC 222. Two PhD students are also working in this
area. And she worked on the manuscript
with Kim Johnson. Sharron Lennon also
did the Annual Report for NC-222.
Sharron presented at the International Textile and Apparel Association
on the Rogers Innovation Theory Paper and a seminar for the E-Commerce group at
Ohio State.
Iowa:
Mary Lynn Damhorst reported that Iowa has been working with Sherri
Lokken on the Journal of Consumer Affairs manuscript on the Technology
Experiment, which was not accepted.
Recommendation is that it be submitted to the FCS Research Journal as
soon as possible. A master’s student
has done a thesis on Uses and Gratifications for Internet and Mail-Order
Catalog Shopping and reported in two presentations at International Textile
and Apparel Association this summer in a poster and oral session. A manuscript is being written. For the panel survey data, cluster analyses
to find profiles of consumers based on purchase and information search
variables were not fruitful. As a
result, a series of regressions were run to find characteristics of consumers
that predict information search and purchase by different media. Two papers will be proposed related to these
regressions on information search and purchase patterns – one for older
consumers and one for the overall sample.
Nebraska: Diane Vigna reported that Nebraska is
participating in two manuscripts.
Nebraska is planning a small retailer’s conference and will be using
some of this data to report at that conference.
Colorado: Susan
Gregory reported that Karen Hyllegard has been working on two manuscripts. Susan Gregory has moved to Eastern Michigan
as a Program Coordinator but has been involved in finishing one manuscript on
the profiles of food and travel products and services. She will not be able to be involved in the
next round of this committee but will complete this next year.
Wisconsin: Cynthia
Jasper reported that Wisconsin has been involved in several manuscripts – the
one on Rogers Innovation Theory
Illinois:
Hilda Lakner reported having contributed to several manuscripts. A student finished a master’s thesis on a
related topic.
Appendix B
NC-222 –
Publications List
Paper 1: This paper entitled “Information Search for Product
Information for Rural Consumers” is being developed. A review of literature is being done. Diane Vigna, Rita Kean, Sharron Lennon and
Mary Lynn Damhorst will be added as authors along with Cynthia Jasper (Leader),
Holly Bastow-Shoop, Linda Manikowske, and Hilda Buckley Lakner.
Paper 2: Title: “Rural Consumer
Purchase Sources and Satisfaction.” This
group has looked at two different ways to frame the paper and will make
decisions on the direction the paper will take.
Paper 3: This paper, “A Test of Roger’s Innovation Theory: Use of the Internet to Purchase Apparel,
Food, Home Furnishings by Rural Consumers” was submitted to Clothing and
Textiles Research Journal and came back with suggested revisions. The group will revise and expect the paper
to be published in the near future.
Paper 4: Laura Jolly has an outline started on this paper and would like
feedback from the group. Rita Kean is
the leader on this paper and will be contacted to see what type of future
involvement she is able to do.
Paper 5: “Rural Consumers’ Use of the Internet for Search and
Acquisition of Food and Travel Services” is the title. This paper is almost ready to send to the Journal
of Interactive Marketing. Authors
are Susan Gregory, Cynthia Jasper Jasper, Sherri Lokken and Mary Lynn Damhorst.
Paper 6: Nothing has been done at this time. Mary Lynn Damhorst and Cynthia Jasper should be added as authors.
Paper 7: “Rural Consumer Attitudes Toward TV and Internet for
Information: Search and Product
Purchase” was submitted to the
Journal of Consumer Affairs but after revision, was still rejected by this
journal. It will be reformatted and
sent to the Family and Consumer Science Research Journal soon.
Paper 8: Title: “US Rural
Consumers Attitudes Toward Adopting the Internet for Information Search.” Nothing has been done at this time. The Leader is Karen Hyllegard and members
are Sheri Lokken, Mary Lynn Damhorst, Hilda Buckley Lakner, Nancy Lyons, Holly
Bastow-Shoop, and Linda Manikowske.
Paper 9: A paper has been drafted on profiling of consumer’s information
search and purchase factors related to
community satisfaction. Authors
are Mary Lynn Damhorst, Rita Kean, and Susan Gregory. Plans are to send this paper to a community development
journal.
Paper 10: A proposal is in development for a paper
similar to Paper 9 with the focus on may be developed based on the information
on older (over 60) consumers. The
leader will be Mary Lynn Damhorst working with Rita Kean and Susan Gregory.
Paper 11: A paper on the experimental data -- “Shopping for Home Furnishings and
Furniture Online: An Examination of
Rural Consumers’ Use of the Internet” has been submitted to ACCI by Sherri
Lokken and the plan is to submit it to FCSRJ when some of the follow up data is
received.
Paper 12: This is a re-write of the Fact Sheet that
was developed last year. A paper will
be developed regarding the fact sheet.
The title is “Internet Retailing:
Impact on Rural Consumers’ Attitudes, Intent to Purchase, and
Satisfaction with Access to Products Within Their Community”. Leader is Cynthia Jasper with Rita Kean. Planned submission is to the International Journal of Consumer
Studies.
Appendix C
NC-222 Panel Survey Follow-up Discussion
The mailing will go out as before
but only to 2,000 + respondents from the first survey. Cynthia Jasper will look for the names of
the respondents and send them to Iowa State.
All cover letters will be done on Iowa State University Stationery this
time.
Mary Lynn Damhorst suggested that
we prepare a one-page, colorful report of what we found in the first survey along
with this the follow-up questionnaire.
Discussion followed regarding whether or not this would bias the
responses on the follow-up. It was
decided that we would not do this extra page.
Rather we will add the names of the universities participating on the
cover of the survey, emphasize the longitudinal nature of the study, and the
need for their response to compare with the first set of data.
Time was spent refining and
revising the questionnaire. We decided
to leave out Question 2 on how long they have been using the product
information sources. We also decided to
eliminate Question 3, 10-17.
It was suggested we add items to
question 18 to include trialability and observability for further analyses
based on Roger’s Theory. These items
could serve as a pre-test for the next project. Possibilities include:
“I know someone
who has purchased on-line.”
“I’ve
watched other people make Internet purchases.”
“My friends
purchase using the Internet.”
Other ideas for the future project
include looking at E-Bay and the success of this type of shopping
alternative.
In the demographic section we
decided to leave out Q. 37 on ethnicity and ask what year you were born as
opposed to listing their age.
This follow-up survey will be sent out later in October 2002.
Other issues discussed: The addition of two questions to the panel
survey so that a paper can be written on the behavior of individuals who have
tried the innovation (Internet, TV, etc.) but have abandoned it. These are true non-adopters of the
innovation.