Content uploaded by Pallabi Das
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Pallabi Das on May 12, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December,, 2021 85
Farmers’ Level of Satisfaction on Agricultural Technology
Information Centre of AAU, Jorhat, Assam
Chiranjeeta Dutta¹, Debajit Borah² and Pallabi Das³
1. PG Scholar, 2. Asstt. Prof. (Ext. Edu.), College of Sericulture, 3. Asstt. Prof. (Ext. Edu.),
College of Agriculture, Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat, Assam, India
Corresponding author e-mail: chiranjeetadutta@gmail.com
Revised Paper Received on July13, 2021, Accepted on August 20, 2021 and Published Online on October 01, 2021
ABSTRACT
The present study was conducted in Jorhat district of Assam to find out farmers’ satisfaction level on Agricultural
Technology Information Centre (ATIC) of Assam Agricultural University (AAU), Jorhat, Assam. 8 villages which are
located within the radius of 50 km from ATIC were selected on random basis for the present study. 120 farmers from
eight villages were selected purposively by using snowball sampling technique with the help of records available in
ATIC register of AAU, Jorhat. The collected data were systematically arranged, classified, tabulated and analysed
with the help of different statistical techniques and tests viz. frequency distribution, percentage, mean, standard
deviation, weighted mean score, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, test of significance of correlation
coefficient and chi-square test. The findings from the study revealed that 12.50 per cent respondents had low, 71.67
per cent respondents had medium and 15.83 per cent respondents had high overall satisfaction level on ATIC. The
study indicated that annual family income had positive and significant relationship whereas social participation
had significant association with satisfaction level of the respondents.
Keywords: Farmers’ satisfaction; Agricultural Technology Information Centre; Snowball sampling technique; Assam.
Satisfaction refers to the contentment or fulfilment
of wishes, expectations, needs of a person according to
the requirement. While measuring the level of
satisfaction of the farmers visiting Agricultural
Technology Information Centre (ATIC), consideration
of several factors like relevancy, quality and usefulness
of various services provided by ATIC will come to the
fore. Satisfaction is defined as a person’s feeling of
pleasure or disappointment resulting from comparing to
his or her expectations in relation to a product’s perceived
performance or outcome (Kotler et al., 2013). Shukla
et al. (2020) opined that large number of technologies
evolved in the field of agriculture are not accepted and
adopted to the fullest extent by the farmers; the gap
between recommendations made by the scientists and
actual use by farmers is frequently encountered.
Assessment of the clienteles’ satisfaction will help
provide an insight to the effectiveness (beyond only
assessing the quality of the service) in fulfilling the
agricultural needs of the farmers because studying
clienteles’ satisfaction may not only help uncover any
constraints in the delivery of outputs and services to the
clients but also help document and publish any
recommendations made by the farmers which may help
increase the organisational efficiency with regards to
agricu ltura l development (Dkhar et al., 2019).
Measuring customer satisfaction is also a way to assess
the quality of the outputs delivered by the organization
ISSN: 0972-2181 (Print), 0976-1071 (Online)
NAAS Rating 5.22 (w.e.f January 2021)
journal homepage: https://www.seea.org.in
Indian Research Journal of
Extension Education Volume 21, No. 4,
October-December , 2021
86 Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December, 2021
as higher satisfaction of its acquisition and use depends
on the perceived quality of the product or service
(Tsiotsou, 2006). Therefore, it can be said tha t
satisfaction is a very important factor in determining
the utilization, adoption and impact of a particular
technology or information disseminated among the
farmers.
The role of appropriate farm information package,
its dissemination and access to farming community are
of paramount importance for agricultural development
(Goudappa et al., 2017).
With the con t i n u o us de velopme n t of new
agricultural technologies and innovations, production of
the farms has quite increased, but often the farmers
are not able to have access to timely and accurate
information and products. It is observed that average
farmers are deprived of accessible and cost-effective
means to get the required information and products in
time. They are not much aware about where and whom
to contact to get up-to-date information about latest
technologies in agriculture as well as for various
problems occurring in their farms. Therefore, Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) considered
the importance of establishing a coordination and linkage
between researchers, scientists and department in-
charges of different disciplines and technology users or
the farmers. The coordination needs to be direct,
integrated and which includes timely availability of
sufficient information and resources (Dutta, 2020).
To strengthen the Research – Extension – Farmers
linkages, National Agricultural Technology Project
(NATP) was launched with the support of World
Bank in 1998. Agricultural Technology Information
Centres (ATICs) were introduced under the Innovations
in Technology Dissemination (ITD) component of
National Agricultural Technology Project (NATP).
(Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR),
2004, DARE/ICAR Annual Report 2003-2004, pp.
189-201).
Agricultural Technology Information Centre
(ATIC) is a regulatory body which links the farmers
with different units of a research institution to provide
various agricultural information and services. ATIC is a
‘single window delivery system’ that acts as single-entry
point at the entrance of the Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR) Institute or State Agricultural
Universities (SAUs) with the aim of helping the farmers
to improve the cultivation practices by providing all the
required information as well resources at a single place.
At present, 44 ATICs are functioning in different
locations of India (Dhanraj, 2010).
The Agricultural Technology Information Centre
(ATIC) of Assam Agricultural University (AAU), Jorhat
was established on 22 January, 2003. The ATIC is under
the administrative control of Directorate of Extension
Education (DEE), Assam Agricultural University
(AAU), Jorhat. The ATIC of AAU, Jorhat has been at
the farmers’ services as the ‘single window’ approach
since 2003. Thus, it is necessary to find out whether the
farmers are satisfied with the services or not and what
is the status of their satisfaction level on ATIC. By
collecting the opinion and feedback of the respondents,
it would be possible to know whether the farmers are
satisfied or dissatisfied with the available products or
services and also about the general experiences they
have about ATIC. Keeping all these in view, the present
study was carried out with the objective: to find out the
satisfaction level of farmers on Agricultural Technology
Information Centre (ATIC) of Assam Agricultural
University (AAU), Jorhat, Assam.
METHODOLOGY
The present study was conducted in purposively
selected Jorhat district of Assam state in India. The
district was sel ected purpo sivel y to assess the
satisfaction level of the farmers on ATIC, which is
located at Jorhat district. Two villages from each main
direction i.e. North, East, West and South; which are
located within the radius of 50 km from the ATIC were
selected by following the selection method of Pandey
(2013). Thus, a total of 8 villages were selected on
random basis following the location of registered
villagers from the ATIC register of AAU, Jorhat. The
names of the selected villages are: Tulsijan Pahumara
Village, Ujani Majkuri Village, Charingia Village, Khangia
Vill age, Na p a mua Village, Po tiagaon Village,
Mohimabari Village, Raidangjuri Village.
From the selected villages, a list of farmers having
regular visits to ATIC was prepared from the records
available in ATIC register of AAU, Jorhat. The
beneficiaries who had been in regular and good contact
with ATIC were selected for the present study. 15
farmers from each village were selected purposively
by using snowball sampling technique. Thus, the total
Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December,, 2021 87
number of respondents for the present study was 120
(N = 120). The data from the respondents were collected
through personal interview method by using a pre-tested
structured research schedule in their own residence or
farm.
To know about the socioeconomic and personal
profile of the respondents, ten numbers of independent
variables were selected viz. age, caste, education,
marital status, type of family, size of family, operational
land holding, occupation, annual family income and social
participation. To col lect data about age of the
respondents, they were classified into different age
groups according to their chronological years whereas
data about caste, marital status, type of family, size of
family, occupation and annual family income, was
collected by developing structured research schedule.
To collect data about education, scale developed by
National Sample Survey Office, Ministry of Statistics
& Programme Implementation, Government of India
(2015) was followed with slight modification; to
determine operational land holding of the respondents,
the norms of Directorate of Economics & Statistics,
Tra nsformation and Development Department,
Government of Assam (2018) was followed and to
know about social participation, scale developed by
Pareek & Trivedi (1964) was followed.
The collected data were systematically arranged,
classified, tabulated and analysed with the help of
different statistical techniques and tests viz. frequency
distribution (f), per cent age (%), mean ( ), standard
deviation (SD), weighted mean score (WMS), Pearson
product-moment correlation coefficient (r value), test
of significance of correlation coefficient (t value) and
chi-square (χ2) test.
The satisfaction level of respondents was measured
by using four categories viz. overall environment,
research products available at ATIC, diagnostic and
other services available at ATIC, information sources
available at ATIC; with slight modification of scale
developed by Songara (2007). Each category was
further divided into different subheads to find out the
existing level of satisfaction of the respondents with the
functioning of ATIC. Satisfaction level of respondents
was measured on a six-point continuum, i.e. Most
Satisfied (MS), Quite Satisfied (QS), Satisfied (S),
Somewhat Satisfied (SS), Dissatisfied (DS) and Not
Applicable (NA). The scoring was done in the order of
5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and 0 respectively. By using the procedure
followed by Dasgupta (1989), the respondents were
classified into three categories of satisfaction level viz.
low, medium and high; on the basis of mean and standard
deviation of the obtained scores.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Socioeconomi c and personal prof ile of the
respondents: The findings from Table 1 reveal that
majority of the respondents belonged to the middle aged
group (40.00%) of 36 to 55 years, from the OBC caste
(56.67%), with educational qualification of High School
passed (26.67%), were married (80.83%), belonged to
joint family type (57.50%) having medium family size
(55.00%) with 5 to 10 members. Majority of the
respondents possessed marginal land holding (70.00%),
had occupation of only farming with no subsidiary
occupation (40.00%). It was observed that majority of
the respondents had medium annual family income
(73.33%) ranged between Rs. 53,764.36 to Rs.
1,56,893.98 with no membership in any organization
(44.17%).
Satisfaction level of respondents: In the present study,
satisfaction level of respondents was measured in
frequency (f) and percentage (%) according to their
response which is presented in Table 2. Weighted Mean
Score (WMS) was given on each feature/service to
rank them accordingly. Overall satisfaction level of
respondents was calculated with the help of mean ( )
and standard deviation (SD) of the obtained scores
which is depicted in the Table 3.
The study revealed that (Table 2), satisfaction level
of the respondents regarding “behaviour of personnel”
ranked first with WMS (4.23), followed by “concept of
ATIC ” wi t h se c ond rank havi ng WMS (3.99),
“information about location of diagnostic centres/
agricultural departments/veterinary departments etc.”
ranked third with WMS (3.97), “chart, poster, map and
graph” ranked fourth with WMS (3.87), “photograph
and picture” ranked fifth with WMS (3.84), “farm
literature (leaflets, magazines, folders, bulletins,
pamphlets, books etc.)” ranked sixth with WMS (3.83),
“infrastructure” ranked seventh with WMS (3.82),
“nursery plants of vegetables, fruits and ornamental
plants” ranked eighth with WMS (3.80), “plants health
clinic” ranked ninth with WMS (3.74), “exhibition of
model and specimen” ranked tenth with WMS (3.63),
88 Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December, 2021
“location” ranked eleventh with WMS (3.58), “seeds
of field crops, vegetables and other horticultural crops”
ranked twelfth with WMS (3.54), “vermiculture and
vermicompost” ranked thirteenth with WMS (3.34),
“processed products and by-products of cereals,
oilseeds, pulses, vegetables, fruits, mushrooms including
spawn, honey, milk, meat and fish, tea, black pepper
etc.” ranked fourteenth with WMS (3.23), “helpline
service, on-farm consultancy for farmers/orchardists”
ranked fifteenth with WMS (3.18), both “bio-fertilizer
viz. azolla etc.” and “projects profiles and consultancy”
ranked sixteenth with WMS (2.98), “poultry strains,
livestock breeds, seme n, fish seed et c.” ranked
seventeenth with WMS (2.87), “IPM-organic and bio-
pesticides” ranked eighteenth with WMS (2.78),
“microbial culture for milk and milk products” ranked
nineteenth with WMS (2.65), “audio-visual aid e.g. video
conference, T.V.” ranked twentieth with WMS (2.23),
“veterinary/animal clinics for small and large animals”
ranked twenty first with WMS (2.07), “tissue cultured
plant materials” ranked twenty second with WMS
(1.77), “soil testing” ranked twenty third with WMS
(1.36), “vaccine/diagnostic kit” ranked twenty fourth
with WMS (1.18), “seed quality testing” ranked twenty
fifth with WMS (0.55), “testing and calibration of
agricultural equipment and implements” ranked twenty
sixth with WMS (0.22) and “small farm implements,
agricultural equipment and drawing of designs” ranked
twenty seventh with WMS (0.08).
The findings presented in Table 3 indicate that
majority of the respondents i.e . 71.67 per cent
respondents had medium whereas 12.50 per cent
respondents had low and 15.83 per cent respondents
had high level of overall satisfaction with ATIC. These
findings are in line with the findings of Kappen (2005)
and Nishi et al. (2011).
Relationship between independent variables and
satisfaction level : The relationship of four quantitative
independent variables having interval and ratio scale viz.
age, size of family, operational land holding, annual family
income with the dependent variable i.e. satisfaction level
of respondents was analysed by using Pearson product-
moment correlation coefficient (r) (Table 4). The
calculated t-value from test of significance of correlation
coefficient was compared with table value of t for 118
degree of freedom at 0.05 and 0.01 level of significance.
Table 1. Distribution of the respondents according to their
socioeconomic and personal profile (N = 120)
Variables No. %
Age
Young (18 to 35 years) 47 39.17
Middle (36 to 55 years) 48 40.00
Old (56 years and above) 25 20.83
Caste
General 33 27.50
Other Backward Class (OBC) 68 56.67
More Other Backward Class (MOBC) 05 4.17
Scheduled Caste (SC) 11 9.17
Scheduled Tribe (ST) 03 2.50
Education
Not literate 03 02.50
Literate but below primary level 12 10.00
Primary school 14 11.67
Middle school 24 20.00
High school 32 26.67
Higher secondary 14 11.67
Diploma/Certificate course 08 06.67
Graduate 11 09.17
Post Graduate and above 02 01.67
Marital status
Single 22 18.33
Married 97 80.83
Widowed 01 00.83
Type of family
Nuclear 51 42.50
Joint 69 57.50
Size of family
Small (2-4 members) 50 41.67
Medium (5-10 members) 66 55.00
Large (>10 members) 04 03.33
Operational land holding
Marginal (Below 1.0 ha) 84 70.00
Small (1.0-2.0 ha) 22 18.33
Semi medium (2.0-4.0 ha) 10 08.33
Medium (4.0-10.0 ha) 04 03.33
Occupation
Farming 48 40.00
Farming + Business 24 20.00
Farming + Service 16 13.33
Farming + Labour 27 22.50
Farming + Others 05 04.17
Annual family income
Low (Less than Rs. 53,764.36) 12 10.00
Medium (Rs. 53,764.36 to Rs. 1,56,893.98) 88 73.33
High (Above Rs. 1,56,893.98) 20 16.67
Social participation
None 53 44.17
Member of one organization 26 21.67
Member of more than one organization 21 17.50
Office holder in such an organization 16 13.33
Wide public leader 04 03.33
Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December,, 2021 89
Table 2. Frequency and Percentage distribution of the respondents according to their satisfaction level (N = 120)
Features and services MS QS S SS DS NA WMS Rank
No. (%) No. (%) No. (%) No. (%) No. (%) No. (%)
Overall environment
Concept of ATIC. 45(37.50) 33(27.50) 38(31.67) 4(3.33) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.99 II
Location. 27(22.50) 30(25.00) 49(40.83) 14(11.67) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.58 XI
Infrastructure. 34(28.33) 35(29.17) 46(38.33) 5(4.17) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.82 VII
Behaviour of personnel. 54(45.00) 40(33.33) 26(21.67) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 4.23 I
Research products available at ATIC.
Seeds of crops, vegetables and other horti. 30(25.00) 35(29.17) 30(25.00) 20(16.67) 5(4.17) 0(0.00) 3.54 XII
Nursery 32(26.67) 38(31.67) 44(36.67) 6(5.00) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.80 VIII
Bio-fertilizer viz. azolla etc. 29(24.17) 23(19.17) 36(30.00) 6(5.00) 0(0.00) 26(21.67) 2.98 XVI
IPM-organic and bio-pesticides. 26(21.67) 22(18.33) 32(26.67) 8(6.67) 3(2.50) 29(24.17) 2.78 XVIII
Small farm implements 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 5(4.17) 0(0.00) 115(95.83) 0.08 XXVII
Tissue cultured plant materials. 9(7.50) 16(13.33) 25(20.83) 14(11.67) 0(0.00) 56(46.67) 1.77 XXII
Processed products etc. 25(20.83) 32(26.67) 41(34.17) 6(5.00) 0(0.00) 16(13.33) 3.23 XIV
Poultry, livestock, semen, fish seed etc. 24(20.00) 25(20.83) 38(31.67) 5(4.17) 0(0.00) 28(23.33) 2.87 XVII
Vermiculture and vermicompost. 39(32.50) 26(21.67) 34(28.33) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 21(17.50) 3.34 XIII
Vaccine/ diagnostic kit. 13(10.83) 13(10.83) 6(5.00) 3(2.50) 0(0.00) 85(70.83) 1.18 XXIV
Microbial culture for milk and milk products 30(25.00) 21(17.50) 28(23.33) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 41(34.17) 2.65 XIX
Diagnostic and other services available at ATIC
Soil testing. 17(14.17) 9(7.50) 12(10.00) 3(2.50) 0(0.00) 79(65.83) 1.36 XXIII
Seed quality testing. 5(4.17) 4(3.33) 7(5.83) 2(1.67) 0(0.00) 102(85.00) 0.55 XXV
Plants health clinic. 34(28.33) 36(30.00) 37(30.83) 11(9.17) 2(1.67) 0(0.00) 3.74 IX
Veterinary/ animal clinics 13(10.83) 24(20.00) 25(20.83) 6(5.00) 0(0.00) 52(43.33) 2.07 XXI
Testing of agricultural equipment 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 6(5.00) 4(3.33) 0(0.00) 110(91.67) 0.22 XXVI
Projects profiles and consultancy 20(16.67) 28(23.33) 38(31.67) 16(13.33) 0(0.00) 18(15.00) 2.98 XVI
Helpline service, on-farm consultancy 21(17.50) 17(14.17) 47(39.17) 32(26.67) 3(2.50) 0(0.00) 3.18 XV
Information about location of diagnostic 39(32.50) 38(31.67) 43(35.83) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.97 III
Information sources available at ATIC.
Farm literature 39(32.50) 27(22.50) 48(40.00) 6(5.00) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.83 VI
Chart, poster, map and graph. 37(30.83) 35(29.17) 43(35.83) 5(4.17) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.87 IV
Photograph and picture. 34(28.33) 36(30.00) 47(39.17) 3(2.50) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.84 V
Exhibition of model and specimen. 29(24.17) 28(23.33) 52(43.33) 11(9.17) 0(0.00) 0(0.00) 3.63 X
Audio-visual aid 22(18.33) 14(11.67) 28(23.33) 9(7.50) 0(0.00) 47(39.17) 2.23 XX
MS : Most Satisfied, QS : Quite Satisfied, S : Satisfied,
SS : Somewhat Satisfied, DS : Dissatisfied, NA: Not Applicable.
Table 3. Frequency and Percentage distribution
of the respondents according to their overall
satisfaction level (N = 120)
Category Score Range No. % MS SD
Low <72.39 15 12.50
Medium 72.39 to 86.19 86 71.67 79.29 6.90
High >86.19 19 15.83
Total 120 100.00
Table 4. Relationship between independent
variables having interval and ratio scale and
satisfaction level of respondents
Independent variables r value t value
Age 0.1107 1.2103
Size of family 0.1448 1.5894
Operational land holding 0.0132 0.1436
Annual family income 0.1880* 2.0796
* Significant at 0.05 level, ** Significant at 0.01 level
90 Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December, 2021
techniques as well as availing the ATIC services and
facilities. Due to that, they receive more benefits in their
farms and thus, they become more satisfied with ATIC
than the respondents with less or no social participation.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded that majority of the respondents
had medium overall satisfaction level on ATIC. It was
observed from the study that most of the respondents
were not aware about all the services and facilities
provided by ATIC. Thus, there arises a need to create
awareness about ATIC among the farmers. More
numbers of good quality research products should be
made available directly in ATIC as most of the farmers
go to ATIC for purchasing the products. Popularization
and efficient working of the helpline service should be
there so that the problems faced by the farmers can be
solved directly. More numbers of models and specimen
should be displayed in ATIC to increase its efficiency.
It was observed from the study that very less number
of the respondents had gone to ATIC regarding queries
related to small farm implements and agricultural
equipment. Therefore, information along with practical
demonstration about small farm implements and
agricultural equipment should be made easily available
to the farmers, so that they become more aware about
application and utilization of the implements and
equipment. The findings of the study revealed that
scientific testing and diagnostic lab is not present in
ATIC. Therefore, establishment of a diagnostic centre
or service in ATIC would be of great help to the farmers
for soil testing, seed quality testing and other relevant
tests. It was also observed from the study that annual
family income had positive and significant relationship
whereas social participation had significant association
with satisfaction level of the respondents. This could
provide wide scope to identify the factors and reasons
which determine the farmers’ satisfaction level on ATIC.
Thus, various strategies should be implemented to
increase the satisfaction level of farmers as well as to
enhance the effectiveness of ATIC.
REFERENCES
Dasgupta, S. (1989). Diffusion of agricultural innovations in village India. New Delhi: Wiley Eastern Limited.
Dhanraj. (2010). Impact assessment of agricultural technology information centre (ATIC) run by SKRAU, Bikaner. M.Sc.
(Agriculture) Thesis, SKRAU, Bikaner (Rajasthan). Available: http://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/displaybitstream?
Table 5. Association between independent variables and
satisfaction level of respondents
Independent variables
2d.f.
Caste 6.6771 8
Education 13.1264 18
Marital status 4.3227 6
Type of family 3.4083 2
Occupation 11.8238 8
Social participation 17.3012* 8
* Significant at 0.05 level ; ** Significant at 0.01 level
The findings from the study revealed that age, size
of family, operational land holding had no significant
correlation with satisfaction level of respondents at 0.05
and 0.01 level of significance.
Whereas, annual family income had positive and
significant correlation with satisfaction level of
respondents at 0.05 level of significance. This may be
due to the reason that when the annual family income
of the respondents increases by utilizing the various
services and facilities of ATIC, then they become more
satisfied with ATIC.
Association between independent variables and
satisfaction level of respondents : The association of
six qualitative independent variables having nominal and
ordinal scale viz. caste, education, marital status, type
of family, occupation, social participation with the
dependent variable i.e. satisfaction level of respondents
was analysed with the help of chi-square (
2) test
(Table 5). The calculated
2 value was compared with
table value at 0.05 and 0.01 level of significance.
The findings from the study indicated that caste,
education, marital status, type of family, occupation had
no significant association with satisfaction level of
respondents at 0.05 and 0.01 level of significance.
Whereas social participation had significant
association with satisfaction level of respondents at 0.05
level of significance. This may be because the farmers
with higher social participation have more involvement
in various organizations. They are more aware and up-
to-date about use of different improved farming
Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu. 21 (4), October - December,, 2021 91
Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Transformation and Development Department, Government of Assam. (2018). Economic
Survey Assam 2017-18. Available: https://des.assam.gov.in/information-services/economic-survey-assam [ April 5, 2019].
Dkhar, S. E.; Devarani, L. and Singh, R. (2019). Clientele satisfaction of extension services provided by KVKs of Meghalaya.
Cu r.J . of Ap plied Sci . an d Tech., 34 ( 5) : 1-12. Avai l able: ht t p s://www.rese a r c hgate . net/ p ublica t i on/
332379708_Clientele_Satisfaction_of_Extension_Services_Provided_by_KVKs_of_Meghalaya. [April 28, 2020].
Dutta, C. (2020). A study on the effectiveness of Agricultural Technology Information Centre (ATIC), AAU, Jorhat. M.Sc.
(Agriculture) Thesis, Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat (Assam).
Goudappa, S.B.; Kalyanrao, J. and Shashidhara, K.K. (2017). Television viewing behaviour of farmers in north eastern districts
of Karnataka. Indian Res. J. Ext. Edu., 17 (3) : 105-108.
Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). (2004). DARE/ICAR Annual Report 2003-2004. Available: https://
krishi.icar.gov.in/jspui/handle/123456789/3696 [Retrieved on November 7, 2018].
Kappen, D. C. (2005). An evaluation of extension activities in the development of aquaculture in Kerala. Ph.D. Thesis, School
of Industrial Fisheries, Cochin University of Science and Technology, Cochin (Kerala). Available: https://dyuthi.cusat.ac.in/
xmlui/bitstream/handle/purl/933/Dyuthi-T0072.pdf?sequence=7 [Retrieved on July 1, 2020]
Kotler P.; Bowen J. T. and Makens, J. C. (2013). Marketing for hospitality and tourism. Upper Saddle river : Pearson
education, Inc.
National Sample Survey Office, Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation, Government of India. (2015). Status of
education and vocational training in India NSS 68th Round (July 2011-June 2012) (NSS Report No. 566(68/10/6)). Available:
http://mospi.nic.in/sites/default/files/publication_reports/nss_report_no_566_21sep15_0.pdf [Retrieved on December
20, 2018].
Nishi; Sah, A.K. and Kumar, R. (2011). Dairy farmers’ satisfaction with Dairy Cooperative Societies: a case study.
Indian Res. J. of Ext.Edu., 11 (1) : 74-78.
Pandey, M. (2013). Assessment of functioning of Agricultural Technology Information Centre (ATIC) and its utilization by the
farm families. M.Sc. (Home Science) Thesis, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur
(Rajasthan). Available: https://krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/displaybitstream?handle=1/5810024808&fileid=eb89b38a-2271-
4a5e-b15e-5271e3ff17c0 [Retrieved on October 27, 2018].
Pareek, U. and Trivedi, G. (1964). Manual of socio-economic status scale (Rural). New Delhi: Manasayan.
Shukla, Y. K.; Shukla, R. and Vani, D. K. (2020). Impact of Integrated Nutrient Management in Khandwa District of Madhya
Pradesh. Indian Res. J. of Ext.Edu., 20 (4) : 59-62.
Songara, H. S. (2007). Impact assessment of Agricultural Technology Information Centre (ATIC) - a formative evaluation. M.Sc.
(Agriculture) Thesis, Maharana Pratap University of Agriculture and Technology, Udaipur (Rajasthan). Available: http:/
/krishikosh.egranth.ac.in/displaybitstream?handle=1/5810033021 [Retrieved on August 24, 2018].
Tsiotsou, R. (2006). The role of perceived product quality and overall satisfaction on purchase intentions. Intl. J. of
Consumer Studies, 30 (2) : 207-217.
