Cargando…

What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment

BACKGROUND: The free list, also written “freelist”, or “free recall”, is an ethnographic method that characterizes the local knowledge of a population about a given cultural domain. However, there is still much to elucidate about the variables that can influence the number of items that participants...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo, de Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino, de Medeiros, Patrícia Muniz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7824914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33485375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5
_version_ 1783640193001062400
author Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo
de Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
de Medeiros, Patrícia Muniz
author_facet Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo
de Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
de Medeiros, Patrícia Muniz
author_sort Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The free list, also written “freelist”, or “free recall”, is an ethnographic method that characterizes the local knowledge of a population about a given cultural domain. However, there is still much to elucidate about the variables that can influence the number of items that participants cite using this technique. This study applied a casual-comparative experimental design to analyze whether 3 months’ time, age, and external stimuli influence the similarity of plant free lists applied at different times. METHODS: Data was collected from 103 farmers from the rural community Alto dos Canutos, in the municipality of Picos, Piauí state, Brazil. Two free lists were conducted at two different times, with an interval of three months between them. Subsequently, the similarity between the first and second free lists of each participant was calculated using the Jaccard Similarity Index. The generalized linear model (GLM) with binomial errors and stepwise approach was used to analyze the effects of age and external stimuli on information collection when comparing free lists applied at different times. RESULTS: Participants’ age influenced the information that the free lists collected, demonstrating that the older the participants, the lower the similarity among the free lists. Among the external stimuli analyzed, only the presence of third parties influenced the content of the free lists at the time of the interview. However, contrary to expectations, third-party presence positively influenced the similarity of the lists. CONCLUSION: The results show that the studied variables age and third-party presence can influence the capture of knowledge. These findings warrant future research into the influences’ causes and their potential mitigation, e.g., by isolation or by breaking the medicinal plant domain into focused sub-domains and conducting simpler, successive free-lists, which can mitigate memory issues. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7824914
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78249142021-01-25 What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo de Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino de Medeiros, Patrícia Muniz J Ethnobiol Ethnomed Research BACKGROUND: The free list, also written “freelist”, or “free recall”, is an ethnographic method that characterizes the local knowledge of a population about a given cultural domain. However, there is still much to elucidate about the variables that can influence the number of items that participants cite using this technique. This study applied a casual-comparative experimental design to analyze whether 3 months’ time, age, and external stimuli influence the similarity of plant free lists applied at different times. METHODS: Data was collected from 103 farmers from the rural community Alto dos Canutos, in the municipality of Picos, Piauí state, Brazil. Two free lists were conducted at two different times, with an interval of three months between them. Subsequently, the similarity between the first and second free lists of each participant was calculated using the Jaccard Similarity Index. The generalized linear model (GLM) with binomial errors and stepwise approach was used to analyze the effects of age and external stimuli on information collection when comparing free lists applied at different times. RESULTS: Participants’ age influenced the information that the free lists collected, demonstrating that the older the participants, the lower the similarity among the free lists. Among the external stimuli analyzed, only the presence of third parties influenced the content of the free lists at the time of the interview. However, contrary to expectations, third-party presence positively influenced the similarity of the lists. CONCLUSION: The results show that the studied variables age and third-party presence can influence the capture of knowledge. These findings warrant future research into the influences’ causes and their potential mitigation, e.g., by isolation or by breaking the medicinal plant domain into focused sub-domains and conducting simpler, successive free-lists, which can mitigate memory issues. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5. BioMed Central 2021-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7824914/ /pubmed/33485375 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Meireles, Melise Pessôa Araujo
de Albuquerque, Ulysses Paulino
de Medeiros, Patrícia Muniz
What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title_full What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title_fullStr What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title_full_unstemmed What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title_short What interferes with conducting free lists? A comparative ethnobotanical experiment
title_sort what interferes with conducting free lists? a comparative ethnobotanical experiment
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7824914/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33485375
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13002-021-00432-5
work_keys_str_mv AT meirelesmelisepessoaaraujo whatinterfereswithconductingfreelistsacomparativeethnobotanicalexperiment
AT dealbuquerqueulyssespaulino whatinterfereswithconductingfreelistsacomparativeethnobotanicalexperiment
AT demedeirospatriciamuniz whatinterfereswithconductingfreelistsacomparativeethnobotanicalexperiment