Publisher: Ubiquity Press
Journal: Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
Subjects: Enterococci bacteria, Q, conservation, environmental monitoring, Pareto principle, Science, water quality monitoring; community-based research; Pareto principle; NYC kayakers; Enterococci bacteria; conservation; citizen science, citizen science, water quality monitoring, NYC kayakers, community-based research
Data collection or generation is the primary way that the majority of volunteers advance the scientific goals of citizen science projects, but other activities such as data consumption also may influence learning, civic, and conservation outcomes. Project designers and managers balance goals for multiple outcomes and thus need to consider the influence of all project-related activities on outcomes. In a study of the kayak-based Citizen’s Water Quality Testing (CWQT) Program in New York City, we compared the characteristics, perceptions, and behaviors of those collecting and using CWQT data (data collectors) and those solely using the data (data consumers). Data collectors (n = 40) and consumers (n = 24) were similar in gender and political orientation, but collectors were younger, devoted more time to the project, and experienced far more face-to-face interactions related to the project. Data collectors and consumers had similar motivations for participation, except that collectors were more likely motivated by recognition for their efforts. Lack of free time was the largest barrier to participation for both types of participants, and a significantly greater barrier for consumers. Data collectors and consumers trusted volunteer-collected data more than government-collected data. Collectors and consumers both recognized multiple scientific, environmental, and social benefits associated with the project, and both were equally likely to use volunteer-collected data for a variety of purposes, such as informing decisions about conservation and recreation. Importantly, both groups were equally likely to undertake a suite of conservation behaviors. We synthesize and expand current conceptual frameworks of citizen science participation and outcomes, highlighting the need for further study to understand mechanisms and linkages between the varied activities of citizen science projects and broader social and ecological impacts. To achieve conservation goals, project managers should broaden the definition of participant to include those carrying out activities other than data collection (such as data use) and explicitly manage for potential benefits derived by consumers of citizen science.
The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!
- Bandura, A., 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84(2): 191-215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033- 295X.84.2.191
- Bera, R. and Hrybyk, A., 2013. iWitness pollution map: Crowdsouring petrochemical accident research. New Solutions 23: 5210533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/ NS.23.3.f
- Bland, J.M. and Altman, D.G., 1997. Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha. BMJ 314(7080): 572. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572
- Bonney, R., Shirk, J.L, Phillips, T.B., Wiggins, A., Ballard, H.L., Miller-Rushing, A.J. and Parrish, J.K., 2014. Next steps for citizen science. Science 343: 1436-1437. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251554
- Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B. and Bonney, R., 2005. Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education 27: 1099-1121. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/09500690500069483
- Clary, E.G. and Snyder, M., 1999. The motivations to volunteer: Theoretical and practical considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science 8(5): 156-159. DOI: V., Kettunen, J., Ostermann, F. and Purves, R. (eds.) https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00037 European Handbook of Crowdsourced Geographic Infor-
- Conrad, C.C. and Hilchey, K.G., 2011. A review of citizen mation, 35-44. London: Ubiquity Press. DOI: https:// science and community-based environmental moni- doi.org/10.5334/bax.c toring: Issues and opportunities. Environmental Moni- Hollow, B., Roetman, P.E.J., Walter, M. and Daniels, C.B., toring & Assessment 176: 273-291. DOI: https://doi. 2015. Citizen science for policy development: The case org/10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5 of koala management in South Australia. Environmen-
- Cooper, C., Larson, L., Dayer, A., Stedman, R. and Decker, tal Science & Policy 47: 126-136. DOI: https://doi. D., 2015. Are wildlife recreationists conservation- org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.10.007 ists? Linking hunting, birdwatching and pro-environ- Holm, S., 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple mental behavior. Journal of Wildlife Management 79: test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 6(2): 446-457. 65-70.
- Cooper, C.B., 2016. Citizen science: How ordinary people Hvenegaard, G.T. and Fraser, L., 2014. Motivations and are changing the face of discovery. The Overlook Press: benefits of citizens engaged in purple martin migraNew York. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.855 tion research. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 19(6):
- Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T. and Bonney, R., 561-563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2 2007. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in resi- 014.940562 dential ecosystems. Ecology and Society 12(2): 11. DOI: Isaac, N.J.B. and Popcock, M.J.O., 2015. Bias and inforhttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02197-120211 mation in biological records. Biological Journal of
- Cornwell, M.L. and Campbell, L.M., 2012. Co-produc- the Linnean Society 115: 522-531. DOI: https://doi. ing conservation and knowledge: Citizen-based sea org/10.1111/bij.12532 turtle monitoring in North Carolina, USA. Social Jordan, R.C., Crall, A., Gray, S., Phillips, T.B. and Mellor, D., Studies of Science 42: 101-120. DOI: https://doi. 2015. Citizen science as a distinct field of inquiry. Bioorg/10.1177/0306312711430440 Science 65: 208-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/
- Curtis, V., 2015. Online citizen science projects: An explora- biosci/biu217 tion of motivation, contribution and participation. PhD Jordan, R.C., Gray, S.A., Howe, D.V., Brooks, W.R. and EhrenDissertation. The Open University: Milton Keynes, UK. feld, J.G., 2011. Knowledge gain and behavioral change Retrieved from: http://oro.open.ac.uk/42239/. in citizen-science programs. Conservation Biology 25:
- Dickinson, J.L. and Bonney, R., 2012. Introduc- 1148-1154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523- tion: Why citizen science? In: Dickinson, J.L. and 1739.2011.01745.x Bonney, R. (eds) Citizen science: Public participa- Kountoupes, D.L. and Oberhauser, K.S., 2012. Citizen scition in environmental research, 1-14. Ithaca: Cornell ence and youth audiences: Educational outcomes of University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/cor- the Monarch Larva Monitoring Project. Journal of Comnell/9780801449116.003.0001 munity Engagement and Scholarship 1: 10-20.
- Dickinson, J.L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R., Larson, L.R., Stedman, R.C., Cooper, C.B. and Decker, D.J., Martin, J., Phillips, T. and Purcell, K., 2012. The cur- 2015. Understanding the multi-dimensional strucrent state of citizen science as a tool for ecological ture of pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Enviresearch and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology ronmental Psychology 43: 112-124. DOI: https://doi. and the Environment 10(6): 291-297. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.004 org/10.1890/110236 Lewandowski, E.J. and Oberhauser, K.S., 2017. Butterfly
- Domroese, M.C. and Johnson, E.A., 2017. Why watch bees? citizen scientists in the United States increase their Motivations of citizen science volunteers in the Great engagement in conservation. Biological Conservation Pollinator Project. Biological Conservation 208: 40-47. 208: 106-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioDOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.020 con.2015.07.029
- Eitzel, M.V., Cappadonna, J.L., Santos-Lang, C., Duerr, R.E., Manfredo, M.J., Driver, B.L. and Tarrant, M.A., 1996. MeasVirapongse, A., West, S.E., Conrad, C., Kyba, M., Bowser, uring leisure motivation: A meta-analysis of the recA., Cooper, C.B., Sforzi, A., Metcalf, A.N., Harris, E.S., reation experience preference scales. Journal of Leisure Thiel, M., Haklay, M., Ponciano, L., Roche, J., Ceccaroni, Research 28(3): 188-213. L., Shilling, F.M., Dorler, D., Hiegl, F., Kiessling, T., Davis, McCormick, S., 2012. After the cap: Risk assessment, citiB.Y. and Jiang, Q., 2017. Citizen science terminology zen science and disaster recovery. Ecology & Society 17: matters: Exploring key terms. Citizen Science: Theory 31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05263-170431 and Practice 2(1): 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/ McKinley, D.C., Miller-Rushing, A.J., Ballard, H.L., Bonney, cstp.96 R., Brown, H., Cook-Patton, S.C., Evans, D.M., French,
- Gearheard, S., Pocernich, M., Stewart, R., Sanguya, J. and R.A., Parrish, J.K., Phillips, T.B., Ryan, S.F., Shanley, L.A., Huntington, H.P., 2010. Linking Inuit knowledge Shirk, J.L., Stepenuck, K.F., Weltzin, J.F., Wiggins, A., and meteorological station observations to under- Boyle, O.D., Briggs, R.D., Chapin, S.F., III, Hewitt, D.A., stand changing wind patterns at Clyde River, Nuna- Preuss, P.W. and Soukup, M.A., 2017. Citizen science vut. Climate Change 100: 267-294. DOI: https://doi. can improve conservation science, natural resource org/10.1007/s10584-009-9587-1 management, and environmental protection. Bio-
- Haklay, M., 2016. Why is participation inequality impor- logical Conservation 208: 15-28. DOI: https://doi. tant? In: Capineri, C., Haklay, M., Huang, H., Antoniou, org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.015
- Newman, G., Wiggins, A., Crall, A., Graham, E., Newman, S. and Crowston, K., 2012. The future of citizen science: Emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 298-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/110294
- Newman, M.E.J., 2005. Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary Physics 46(5): 323-351. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00107510500052444
- Nov, O., Arazy, O. and Anderson, D., 2011. Technologymediated citizen science participation: A motivational model. Proceedings of the 5th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 249-256.
- Overdevest, C. and Mayer. B., 2008. Harnessing the power of information through community monitoring: Insights from social science. Texas Law Review 86: 1493-1526.
- Overdevest, C., Orr, C.H. and Stepenuck, K., 2004. Volunteer stream monitoring and local participation in natural resource issues. Research in Human Ecology 11: 177-185.
- Phillips, T.B., Bonney, R. and Shirk, J.L., 2012. What is our impact? Toward a unified framework for evaluating outcomes of citizen science participation. In: Dickinson, J. and Bonney, R. (eds.), Citizen science: Public participation in environmental research, 82-96. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. DOI: https://doi. org/10.7591/cornell/9780801449116.003.0006
- Phillips, T.B., Ferguson, M., Minarchek, M., Porticella, N. and Bonney, R., 2014. User's guide for evaluating learning outcomes in citizen science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab of Ornithology. Available at: Citizenscience.org.
- Powell, M.C. and Colin, M., 2008. Meaningful citizen engagement in science and technology: What would it really take? Science Communication 30(1): 126-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547008320520
- Raddick, M.J., Bracey, G., Gay, P.L., Lintott, C.J., Cardamone, C., Murray, P., Schawinski, K., Szalay, A.S. and Vandenberg, J., 2013. Galaxy Zoo: Motivations of citizen scientists. Astronomy Education Review 12(1): 1-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2011021
- Raymond, C.M., Fazey, I., Reed, M.S., Stringer, L.C., Robinson, G.M. and Evely, A.C., 2010. Integrating local scientific knowledge for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management 91: 1766-1777. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.03.023
- Rotman, D., Hammock, J., Preece, J.J., Boston, C.L., Hansen, D.L., Bowser, A. and He, Y., 2014. Motivations affecting initial and long-term participation in citizen science projects in three countries. Paper presented at the iConference 2014 Proceedings. Urbana-Champaign, Illinois. https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/handle/2142/47301.
- Shirk, J.L., Ballard, H.L., Wilderman, C.C., Phillips, T.B., Wiggins, A, Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Minarchek, M., Lewenstein, B.V., Krasny, M.E. and Bonney, R., 2012. Public participation in scientific research: A framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society 17(2): 29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-04705-170229
- Silvertown, J., Harvey, M., Greenwood, R., Dodd, M., Rosewell, J., Rebelo, T., Ansine, J. and McConway, K., 2015. Crowdsourcing the identification of organisms: A case study of iSpot. ZooKeys 480: 135-146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.480.8803
- Stodolska, M., Shinew, K.J., Floyd, M.F. and Walker, G.J., 2015. Race, ethnicity, and leisure. Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL.
- Sullivan, B.L., Aycrigg, J.L., Barry, J.H., Bonney, R.E., Bruns, N., Cooper, C.B., Damoulas, T., Dhondt, A.A., Diettrich, T., Farnsworth, A., Fink, D., Fitzpatrick, J.W., Fredericks, T., Gerbracht, J., Gomes, C., Hochachka, W.M., Iliff, M.J., Lagoze, C., La Sorte, F.A., Merrifield, M., Morris, W., Phillips, T.B., Reynolds, M., Rodewald, A.D., Rosenberg, K.V., Trautmann, N.M., Wiggins, A., Winkler, D.W., Wong, W.K., Wood, C.L., Yu, J. and Kelling, S. 2014. The eBird enterprise: An integrated approach to development and application of citizen science. Biological Conservation 169: 31-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.11.003
- Toomey, A.H. and Domroese, M.C., 2013. Can citizen science lead to positive conservation attitudes and behaviors? Human Ecology Review 20: 50-62.
- Trumbull, D.J., Bonney, R., Bascom, D. and Cabral, A., 2000. Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project. Science Education 84: 265-275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 237X(200003)84:2<265::AID-SCE7>3.0.CO;2-5
- Tulloch, A.I.T., Possingham, H.P., Joseph, L.N., Szabo, J. and Martin, T.G., 2013. Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biological Conservation 165: 128-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biocon.2013.05.025
- Van Den Berg, H.A., Dann, S.L. and Dirkx, J.M., 2009. Motivations of adults for non-formal conservation education and volunteerism: Implications for programming. Applied Environmental Education & Communication 8(1): 6-17. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/15330150902847328
- Verba, S., Schlozman, K.L., Brady, H. and Nie, N.H., 1993. Citizen activity: Who participates? What do they say? American Political Science Review 87(2): 303-318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2939042
- Vyas, S. and Kumaranayake, L., 2006. Constructing socio-economic status indices: How to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning 21(6): 459-468. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapol/czl029
- Welch, B.L., 1938. The significance of the difference between two means when the population variances are unequal. Biometrika 34: 29-35.
- Whiting, J.A., Larson, L.R., Green, G.T. and Kralowec, C., 2017. Outdoor recreation motivation and site preferences across diverse racial/ethnic groups: A case study of Georgia State Parks. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 18: 10-21. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j/jort.2017.02.001
- Wood, C., Sullivan, B., Iliff, M., Fink, D. and Kelling, S., 2011. eBird: Engaging Birders in Science and Conservation. PLoS Biology 9: e1001220. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001220
No related research data.
No similar publications.