ABSTRACT

Background: Kelman’s Processes of Change suggest that individuals participate in behaviors for one of three reasons: because it is required (compliance), because the behavior allows them to maintain a particular social status (identification), or because the behavior aligns with the individuals core beliefs (internalization). This study aims to assess the utility of this model in understanding farmers’ attitudes and behaviors regarding power take-off (PTO) shielding to prevent entanglements.

Methods: Surveys collected data on 673 farmers’ attitudes and behaviors related to PTO shielding in 14 highly agricultural counties of New York. Participants were classified based on Kelman’s Processes of Change.

Results: In total, 59.44% of participants could be classified into one of the three Kelman categories based on both attitude and behavior. Of these participants, 18% were classified in the compliance phase, 3% in identification, and 79% in internalization. Of participants who did not display appropriate shielding behavior, 77% still reported having internalized the importance of PTO shielding.

Conclusions: Two main challenges occurred in using Kelman’s Processes of Change to assess PTO shielding behaviors among farmers. First, the attitude and behaviors of participants were not always reflective of one another, and second, participants tended to have difficulties distinguishing their primary motivations for PTO shielding (compliance, identification, or internalization). Though participants can be classified based on Kelman’s Processes of Change and researchers can benefit from a more in-depth understanding of motivations related to changing safety behaviors, this study indicates that there are challenges in accurately assigning individuals to their appropriate “change” classification.

摘要

背景：凯尔曼的变革过程表明，个人出于以下三个原因之一参与行为：因为这是必需的（顺从），因为行为允许他们保持特定的社会地位（认同），或者因为行为与个人核心一致信念（内化）。本研究旨在评估该模型在了解农民对取力器 (PTO) 屏蔽以防止缠绕的态度和行为方面的效用。

方法：调查收集了纽约 14 个高度农业县的 673 名农民对 PTO 屏蔽相关的态度和行为的数据。参与者根据凯尔曼的变革过程进行分类。

结果：总共有 59.44% 的参与者可以根据态度和行为分为三个 Kelman 类别之一。在这些参与者中，18% 被分类为合规阶段，3% 被分类为识别阶段，79% 被分类为内化阶段。在没有表现出适当屏蔽行为的参与者中，77% 的人仍然报告说已经内化了 PTO 屏蔽的重要性。

结论：在使用 Kelman 的变化过程评估农民的 PTO 屏蔽行为时出现了两个主要挑战。首先，参与者的态度和行为并不总是相互反映，其次，参与者往往难以区分他们保护 PTO 的主要动机（合规、认同或内化）。尽管可以根据 Kelman 的变化过程对参与者进行分类，并且研究人员可以从更深入地了解与变化的安全行为相关的动机中受益，但这项研究表明，将个人准确分配到适当的“变化”分类中存在挑战。