89

traditional resource access based (z=-0.41, p=0.68, a = 0.05) (Table 4-7 and Appendix

E, Figure 5).

Modem Resource Access

 I used two items in the index to determine each participant's modern resource

access score. I used summative scores for analysis of modem resource access. I

removed one participant's responses from the analysis due to responding to this index as

not applicable. This was the same participant who responded in the same manner to the

control beliefs measures. There were no missing data among other participants.

 I ran a Mann-Whitney U test to determine if there was a difference between groups.

There was no a significant difference between high TAP user and low TAP user groups

modern self-identity (z=-0.74, p=0.46, a = 0.05 ) (Table 4-7 and Appendix E, Figure 6).

 I measured access to resources, in general, with two open response questions in the

interview. "Where do you go to get information about farming/gardening?" "Where (or to

whom) do you go to when you have issues or concerns about your farm/garden?" Table

4-13 provides responses to these questions

Table 4-13: Interview responses of high and low TAP user groups for questions
 measuring resource access, Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma, 2005.
 Low TAP user High TAP user
Number of participants 9 25
Get information** (5)OSU Extension (2)Elders (2)other (5) nowhere
 farmers (2) farm magazines (2) USDA (5) internet
 outreach (5)parents
 (3)elders
 (3)books
 (3)moon
 (2) OSU Extension
Issues or concerns** (3)Extension (8) family
 (2) Nowhere (7)nowhere
 (2)other farmers (4)friends
 (2) elders (2)elders

* depicts actual number or participants with this response, some participants provided
multiple reasons which are also included here
**only practices listed two or more times total by user group participants are listed