Search bioRxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/bioRxiv

bioRxiv · 10.1101/468728

Trust in scientists and rates of noncompliance with a fisheries rule in the Brazilian Pantanal

Gore, M. L.·Shirley, E.
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Natural resource rules exist to manage resources and the people that interact with them. These rules often fail because people do not comply with them. Decisions to comply with natural resource rules often are based on attitudes about legitimacy of rules and the perceived risks of breaking rules. Trust in agencies promulgating rules in part may determine perceptions of legitimacy of the rule, and in turn depends on individuals trust in different agency actors. The purpose of this research was to explore the relationship between fishing rule noncompliance and trust in scientists, a key group within management agencies. We interviewed 41 individuals in one rural fishing community in the Brazilian Pantanal from April to August, 2016, to assess (1) noncompliance rates, (2) noncompliance-related attitudes, and (3) the relationship between trust in scientists and noncompliance decisions in the region. We found that among study participants, noncompliance was common and overt. Trust in scientists performing research in the region was the best predictor of noncompliance rate with a fishing rule (nonparametric rank correlation{rho} = -0.717; Probit model pseudo-R2 = 0.241). Baseline data from this research may help inform future interventions to minimize IUU fishing and protect the Pantanal fishery. Although our results are specific to one community in the Pantanal, trust in scientists is potentially an important factor for compliance decisions in similar situations around the world. These results build not only on compliance theory but also speak to the important role that many scientists play in the geographic areas in which they conduct their research.

Source connections

Explore related subjects

scientific communication and educationPreprint

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gore, M. L., Shirley, E.. 2018-11-12. Trust in scientists and rates of noncompliance with a fisheries rule in the Brazilian Pantanal. https://doi.org/10.1101/468728

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

bioRxiv2026

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2018

To: Plos OneKnowledge, experiences and perceptions of the Ghana National Health Insurance Scheme in three districts

BackgroundGhanas National Health Insurance Scheme is a demand side programme where the governing authority registers clients and purchases health care services for them from public and private providers. Access of services is high across a broad Benefits Package with no parallel enrolment necessary for any type of service at the point of access. Nonetheless, there is evidence of difficulty in acquiring and use of the NHIS card to access health care services.\n\nObjectiveWhile studies had been conducted into general awareness, there was no linkage between awareness, uptake and experiences with registration and use of the card. This study fills this gap.\n\nMethodsThis is a descriptive study. A mix of qualitative (39 Focus Group Discussions) and quantitative (625 household interviews) methods were used to collect the data. Qualitative data was analysed manually using a thematic approach while a frequency analysis was done for the quantitative data.\n\nResultsKnowledge about the Scheme was near universal. Enrolment was lower among FGD discussants, 38.7% had valid cards, than for household respondents, 62.9% valid cards. While mixed experiences with the registration process was observed among FGD discussants, 74% of the households ranked attitudes of Scheme staff as positive. The study found the NHIS card facilitates access to facility based health care. Satisfaction levels with use of the card were mixed and contextual among discussants. However, 90% of households reported their cards were readily accepted at health facilities. Expired card (51.4%) and health facility had stopped accepting NHIS cards (14.3%) were mentioned as reasons for non-acceptance.\n\nConclusionPeoples experience during registration and use of the NHIS card to access health care has lasting effect on their perceptions of the Scheme. This can be harnessed to manage the high expectations, grow membership, discourage frivolous use and address artificial barriers of access.

scientific communication and education↗
bioRxiv2018

A qualitative exploration of eyecare professional perspectives on Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) care

Despite the existence of evidence-based recommendations to decrease risk and progression of Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) for some time, self-reported practices suggest that eyecare professionals advice and people with AMDs adherence to these recommendations can be very poor. This study uses qualitative methods to explore Australian eyecare professionals perspective on barriers to effective AMD care. Seven focus groups involving 65 optometrists were conducted by an experienced facilitator. A nominal group technique was used to identify, prioritize and semi-quantify barriers and enablers to AMD care. Participants individually ranked their perceived top five barriers and enablers with the most important granted a score of 5 and the least important a score of 1. For each barrier or enabler, the number of votes it received and its total score were recorded. Barriers and enablers selected by at least one participant in their top 5 were then qualitatively analysed, grouped using thematic analysis and total score calculated for each consolidated barrier or enabler. In-depth individual interviews were conducted with 10 ophthalmologists and 2 optometrists. Contributions were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed with NVivo software. One hundred and sixty-nine barriers and 51 enablers to AMD care were identified in the focus groups. Of these, 102 barriers and 42 enablers were selected as one of their top 5 by at least one participant and further consolidated into 16 barriers and 10 enablers after thematic analysis. Factors impacting AMD care identified through analysis of the transcripts were coded to three categories of influence: patient-centered, practitioner-centered, and structural factors. Eyecare professionals considered poor care pathways, people with AMDs poor disease understanding / denial, and cost of care / lack of funding, as the most significant barriers to AMD care; they considered shared care model, access, and communication as the most significant enablers to good AMD care. These findings suggest that Australian eyecare professionals perceive that there is a need for improved patient support systems and appropriately funded, clearer care pathway to benefit people with AMD.

scientific communication and education↗