Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 59 of the 59 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An analysis of farmers’ intention to use green pesticides: The application of the extended theory of planned behavior and health belief model

Ataei, Pouria, Gholamrezai, Saeed, Movahedi, Reza, Aliabadi, Vahid·2021·Journal of Rural Studies

Abstract

Abstract The use of chemical pesticides in agriculture has damaged agricultural land, fisheries, fauna, and flora. Furthermore, increased mortality and morbidity of humans due to the unsafe use of chemical pesticides are the most prevalent and serious occupational hazards faced by farmers. The present study aimed to examine farmers’ intention to use green pesticides using two models – the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and the health belief model (HBM) – as the research framework (moral norms and self-identity were used on the TPB framework as additional constructs). The population was composed of farmers in the provinces of Kermanshah, Lorestan, and Hamedan in Western Iran of whom 480 farmers were sampled using the stratified random sampling method. The research instrument was a questionnaire. Structural equation modelling was used for data analysis. Results showed that in TPB, the constructs of moral norms, attitude, and self-identity accounted for 52.2 percent of the variance in the intention to use green pesticides. According to HBM, perceived benefits, perceived susceptibility, cues to action, and motivation could capture 61.2 percent of the variance in the intention. It was revealed that both theories could potentially predict intention, but HBM outperformed TPB in this sense. It is recommended to hold local and regional meetings for knowledge and technology sharing, develop infrastructure for production and distribution of inputs, emphasize the role of green pest management in the safety of agricultural crop producers and consumers through mass media, and farms with follow-up training programs.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.11.003

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 59 references

Metadata

Authors
Ataei, P., Gholamrezai, S., Movahedi, R., & Aliabadi, V.
Venue
Journal of Rural Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-01
Volume
81
Pages
374-384
ISSN
0743-0167 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3105311410
Cited by
258
References
59
FWCI
35.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An analysis of farmers’ intention to use green pesticides: The application of the extended theory of planned behavior and health belief model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.11.003
The paper
Ataei, P., Gholamrezai, S., Movahedi, R., & Aliabadi, V. (2021). An analysis of farmers’ intention to use green pesticides: The application of the extended theory of planned behavior and health belief model. Journal of Rural Studies. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2020.11.003

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.