Botanical Knowledge of a Group of College Students in South Carolina, U.S.A
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21175869 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Gail E Wagner (University of South Carolina, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2008 |
| Volume | 6 |
| Pages | 443 |
| Publication date | 2008-12-27 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Ethnobotany Research and Applications (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1547-3465 • E-ISSN: 1547-3465 |
| Publisher | Ilia State University (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.17348/era.6.0.443-458 |
| OpenAlex | W1530105329 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 16 |
Thirty-one 18-22-year-old college students in South Carolina, U.S.A., were asked to freelist garden flowers, local grasses, local crops, and native/local trees, vines, and wildflowers/weeds. Answers were scored as correct, wrong, or inappropriate. Whereas the students could list an average of 9.0 crops, 8.4 trees, and 5.4 garden flowers correctly, they could list only 1.9 vines, 1.7 wildflowers/weeds, and 1.4 grasses correctly. Incorrect answers (answers that were wrong or inappropriate) were listed by 22.5% to 58.0% of the students depending on the domain. The types of incorrect answers given indicate a fuzzy understanding or knowledge of local ecology, plant morphology or habit, and domesticated versus wild or weedy status. Results indicate the solicited life forms or domains of plants hold unequal cultural saliency for this selection of students. Knowledge appears highest for crops, trees (particularly planted trees), and showy garden flowers, reflecting highest familiarity with the surrounding managed landscape and least familiarity with wild and less noticeable vegetation. Some answers reflect vicarious knowledge of plants rather than knowledge gained through direct experience. This study points out the need to carefully consider which domains of plant knowledge should be compared cross-culturally, and the need to quantify and examine incorrect as well as correct answers
Biology · Domestication · Geography · Habit · Animal and Plant Science Education · Plant and animal studies · Psychology · Social Psychology · Urban Green Space and Health · Ecology
Do They Really "Know Nothing"? An inquiry into ethnobotanical knowledge of students in Arizona, USA
Botanical Knowledge of a Group of South Carolina Elementary School Students
One questionnaire—Two points in time
Variation and Transmission of Sonoran Wild Food Knowledge in Southern Arizona
Folkbotanical classification
Concepts and Methods in Studies Measuring Individual Ethnobotanical Knowledge
Ecological Knowledge is Lost in Wealthier Communities and Countries
‘Loveable’ mammals and ‘lifeless’ plants
Is love of nature in the US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet use, and oil prices
Evidence for a fundamental and pervasive shift away from nature-based recreation
The Native Mind
Botanical Knowledge of a Group of South Carolina Elementary School Students
Category use and category learning
Where Do Tree Terms Come From
Salience and relativity in classification
Culture as Consensus
Considerations for Collecting Freelists in the Field
Recall, Similarity Judgment, and Identification of Trees
Evolution and devolution of knowledge
Persistence of Botanical Knowledge among Tzeltal Maya Children
Culture Consensus as a Statistical Model
| Citations per year | 0.28 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2008 - 2026 (19) |
| Highly cited | No |