Attitudes And Perceptions Towards Genetically Modified Organisms: A Study In India

1. Create an abstract of your own words that discusses what the whole story is all about.
2. For the introduction, clearly discuss the topic (what it is all about, how the authors end up with that topic) and objectives of your research journal and its importance, significance and impact.
3. Methodology. Outlined the whole process used in your research journal. Use a schematic diagram if necessary to show how the study was performed. Explain the different steps or procedures used in the study clearly and briefly.
4. Results and Discussion. Discuss the results in a manner that it will satisfy both the objectives and methodology. For the discussion of the results, clearly explain the phenomena happened that lead to the results presented.
5. Discuss the conclusions in accordance to the order of the objectives presented in the study. 

Methodology

The given study was done to understand the attitudes and perceptions towards Genetically Modified Organisms in India between 2007 and 2010 by Gene Campaign. This is a researchable topic since attitudes and perceptions can be studied through a quantitative and qualitative analysis. As opined by Palinkas et al. It is possible to study such aspects by conducting a mixed method research (using qualitative and quantitative data) by incorporating questionnaires and interview that can capture the though process as well as the beliefs, ideas and attitudes towards a particular topic.

This is an important research topic since GMO has the potential to address the current deficit in the production of food to meet the rising population demand and also because a significant amount of misunderstanding and misconceptions remain within the public thereby causing an underutilization and under implementation of this technology. The study involved farmers, consumers, students, media personnel, agricultural officials who were interviewed and provided with questionnaires to understand their attitudes and perceptions towards GMO.

The researchers conducted interviews and provided questionnaires to the respondents to understand their beliefs and attitudes that can affect their propensity to use GMO. The study was consistent in its interview and questionnaire structure and provided reliable and valid information collected directly from the participants who are directly involved in the usage and consumption of GMO. However in this case the type of sampling was not clarified and neither was any strategy to avoid sampling bias was identified which can also reduce the reliability and validity of the study.

The method of using interviews and questionnaires is also a valid and appropriate strategy as it can allow the researchers to capture the mindsets of the respondents which can influence the utilization or non utilization of GMO and therefore help the researchers to understand the factors the beliefs and though processes that facilitates or prevents the usage of GMO. Asking questions such as the types of pesticides the farmers would like to use, the authorities thy would trust about information of GMO seeds and asking consumers about their perceptions on GM foods can help to understand whether they are ready to use this technology.

It has been pointed that outlining the methods and instruments of a study is one of the most important aspect of any research as it allows other researchers to understand how exactly the study was conducted, data gathered and analyzed which can help in the replication of the study and cross validate the findings. However, the process of interviewing the participants based on the questions in this study can be replicated as all the questions have been outlined on the study.

Results and Discussion

The steps that were involved in the analysis of the data have not been clearly identified in this study. Instead the study directly reported the statistical data in the form of graphs, tables and charts that showed the attitudes and beliefs of the respondents. Moreover, the study also directly delved into the findings from the study without providing the raw data that was collected. As a result of this, the method of the study remains unclear expect for the fact that this was a quantitative study that used interviews and questionnaires. Similarly the study also did not outline how the collected data was analyzed by the researchers and no justification provided for the selection of the used methodology as a result of which it is unclear the type of data processing that was used in the study. Such aspects have significantly affected the reliability and validity of the study.

The study used both qualitative and quantitative data through closed and open ended questions that is aimed to understand the perceptions and attitudes of the respondents towards GMO

However since the study did not outline the method of the study or the type of data analysis that was done on the information, it does affect the rigor of the study. The data and the claims of the study can still be substantiated by the responses from the interviewees and research participants as these questionnaires can clearly help to understand the attitudes and beliefs on GMO. Thus it can be said that the data was not completely rigorous in nature but can still be substantiated through eh response of the participants.

Most of the results that was reported in this study was relevant to the study and research question and allowed to understand the attitudes and perceptions of the respondents. The questions provided for the consumers or students have been focused on GM foods and whether they would prefer to consume such food or if they are worried about their health effects. These questions could help to understand whether the consumers have any significant concerns regarding the safety of the GM food which needs to be addressed by the Food and healthcare industries. The questions regarding what the respondents thought about the availability of GM foods, sources thy find reliable for information on GM foods and features that consumers though was important for GM foods was relevant because it could help the researchers to understand how to improve the use of GM food. However the questions made to the farmers were mostly related to pesticides and pest control strategies which was only one aspect of GMO crops (pesticide resistance). The study did not however consider the other types of GMO that provided high yields or better environmental tolerance within the questionnaire as a result of which it could not be clarified what the farmers thought about the usage of such varieties of GMO.

The aim of the study was to understand the attitudes and perceptions of people towards GMO and the results of the questionnaire and interviews was able to point out towards such perceptions and attitudes as well as understand the factors that might be related to such perceptions and attitudes towards GMO. The interview questions were related to the usage of GM foods, GM crops and the factors that can facilitate their usage and consumption. Thus the interpretation was related to the research topic and it helped to understand the factors that might help to increase the utilization of GMO technology. It has been suggested by some authors that qualitative studies that involved questionnaires directly based on the research topic can be useful for understanding the mindsets of people and therefore understand the underlying factors that can influence the behavior. Moreover, by understanding such factors it is also possible to understand how to best influence and enhance such behaviors. In this study, understanding the factors that can help to facilitate the usage of GMO through the questionnaire and interviews has helped to interpret the data in relation to the research topic. Therefore it can be stated that the results were indeed interpreted in relation to the research.

In this study, all the findings were provided and the results were not segregated on the basis of their importance. The results were all reported one by one using graphs, charts and diagrams that showed the responses of the respondents to the questionnaires. The results were also differentiated on the bases of the groups of respondents such as farmers and consumers. However since the study did not segregate the results on the bases of their relevance or importance, it is difficult to understand which were the most important question for the study. For any research it is important to categories the findings on the bases of its importance so that it is possible to understand the questions that have the most significance to the study. Moreover, stating the most important result also helps to understand the main aspects within the study. However, since all the study results were outlined in the study it can be assumed that all the results might have equivalent significance to the research, in which case such an assumption should have been outlined by the researchers.

The results provided various relevant information that helped to understand the perceptions and attitudes of the respondents towards GMO and understand the propensity of people to use this technology. Asking the consumers about their knowledge on GMO such as if they have heard of GMO, if they thought they were available in the Indian market, if they heard about their benefits and risks, who is benefited from the GMO industry, the rights of the people towards information on GM food, GM food labeling policies, GM food testing and monitoring and features they feel are most important for GM foods can help to understand whether they feel comfortable and safe to use GM food or if they have any significant concerns regarding its health effects and its regulation in the market which needs to be addressed to improve GM food utilization. Asking the farmers about their preferences towards pesticides and the factors they would prefer in the GM crops can help to increase the use of GM crops by them. The questionnaires for the farmers can also help to understand the sources of information they feel are the most trustworthy for GM crops related information which can be used to further educate the farmers on GMO and how to best utilize them to increase to improve their yield.

Conclusion: 

The study did not outline the main points that was drawn out of the study and instead left it up to the readers to understand what the findings from the interviews and questionnaires meant. This was a significant flaw in the research since it did not provide an insight that the researchers made from the study as well as what their conclusions were. The study does not provide any recommendations from the research which might have been useful to inform policy changes on GMO. Instead the study ended with the findings of the interviews which were thematically arranged. This significantly affected the strength of the study. Suggestions for future studies or identification for research gaps was also not done on this study which could have helped other researchers to continue with the study.

Through the study it can be possible to identify the attitudes and perceptions that foster or challenge the use and consumption of GMO which justifies the choice of the topic in this study. This is a relevant strategy since they play an important role in the usage of the GMO technology. However, the study does not provide any statistical information about GMO usage and its possible trends in India or worldwide to develop a context for the study which is a significant flaw in the research design.

It should also be noted that since the study did not include the raw data from the interviews and questionnaires it does affect the reliability of the information to some extent. It has been suggested by some authors that sampling strategies and sampling bias can influence the reliability and validity of the study. The study however did not outline the methods and instruments used in its details. The study directly delves into the findings from the questionnaire without outlining the research question, background or the methodology of the study which can make the process of replicating the study challenging.  Thus a lack of such information can significantly reduce the possibility to replicate this study in its exactness.

By analyzing the structure of the study it can be assumed that the data collected did not require much analysis and most of the questions and their answers were self explanatory.  . The rigor of the data could be attributed by the utilization of the standard questionnaire that was given to all the respondents and due to the fact that the statistics from the collected data was reported in the study. Additionally, the strategy for the collection of the data can be understood from the structure of the study that used both qualitative and quantitative approaches within a mixed method system also added to the rigor of the study. . Thus, even though most of the questions were relevant to the research, some of the questions still had limited relevancy to the study.

Conclusion:

The results of the study provided some fresh insights and new perspectives into the attitudes and the perceptions of the participants towards GMO in relation to the authorities the respondents trusted on for GMO related data. It can be stated that recommendations as well as suggestions for future studies is an important aspect for any research since it can help to address the main problem that the research tried to address.

References:

Alavi M, Archibald M, McMaster R, Lopez V, Cleary M. Aligning theory and methodology in mixed methods research: Before Design Theoretical Placement. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2018 Feb 11:1-4.

Ary D, Jacobs LC, Irvine CK, Walker D. Introduction to research in education. Cengage Learning; 2018.

Berthelsen H, Hakanen J, Kristensen TS, Lönnblad A, Westerlund H. A qualitative study on the content validity of the social capital scales in the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire (COPSOQ II).

Couée I. Hidden Attraction: Empirical Rationality in GMO Opposition. Trends in plant science. 2016 Feb 1;21(2):91.

Forrester MA, Sullivan C, editors. Doing qualitative research in psychology: A practical guide. SAGE Publications Limited; 2018 Dec 29.

Fraiture MA, Herman P, Papazova N, De Loose M, Deforce D, Ruttink T, Roosens NH. An integrated strategy combining DNA walking and NGS to detect GMOs. Food chemistry. 2017 Oct 1;232:351-8.

King N, Horrocks C, Brooks J. Interviews in qualitative research. SAGE Publications Limited; 2018 Dec 29.

McCusker K, Gunaydin S. Research using qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods and choice based on the research. Perfusion. 2015 Oct;30(7):537-42.

Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2015 Sep 1;42(5):533-44.

Rassia ST. Research Data Collection. InWorkplace Environmental Design in Architecture for Public Health 2017 (pp. 33-39). Springer, Cham.

Reardon B, Moore N, Kofman E, Van Allen EM. Feature-based clinical interpretation of whole exome and transcriptome data for precision cancer medicine.

Weber K, Lasch F, Koch A. New research strategy with ambiguous implications: A comment on “Planning future studies based on the conditional power of a meta?analysis”. Statistics in medicine. 2018 Apr 15;37(8):1402-4.