LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:

OpenAIRE is about to release its new face with lots of new content and services.
During September, you may notice downtime in services, while some functionalities (e.g. user registration, login, validation, claiming) will be temporarily disabled.
We apologize for the inconvenience, please stay tuned!
For further information please contact helpdesk[at]openaire.eu

fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Lewandowski, Eva; Caldwell, Wendy; Elmquist, Dane; Oberhauser, Karen (2017)
Publisher: Ubiquity Press
Journal: Citizen Science: Theory and Practice
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: public participation in scientific research, Q, Science, citizen science, public opinion, self-confidence, citizen science; public participation in scientific research; public opinion; self-confidence
Identifiers:doi:10.5334/cstp.77
Members of the public are the foundation and the backbone of citizen science, but much remains unknown about how the public views citizen science. We conducted a survey of public familiarity with, and perceptions of, citizen science. We found that less than half of respondents were familiar with the term “citizen science,” but over 70% were familiar with the concept by another name. Most respondents were more confident in hypothetical citizen science findings when professional scientists were involved to some degree, compared to situations in which only citizen scientists were involved. Confidence in citizen science findings tended to increase with age, despite the fact that self-confidence in respondents’ own abilities to perform citizen science tasks decreased with age. Fewer than half of respondents (31–47%), and more men than women, were confident in their own ability to perform science process tasks, with the exception of collecting data (53% confident), and only slightly more predicted they would enjoy such activities. Based on our findings, we suggest ways in which leaders of citizen science projects can better promote recruitment, retention, and engagement on the part of volunteers and the public as a whole.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Blanch, D.C., Hall, J.A., Roter, D.L. and Frankel, R.M. 2008. Medical student gender and issues of confidence. Patient Education and Counseling, 72: 374-381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.05.021
    • Bonney, R., Phillips, T.B., Ballard, H.L. and Enck, J.W. 2015. Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1): 2-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662515607406
    • 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(9): 1099-1121. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/09500690500069483
    • Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2014. Volunteering in the United States-2014. No. USDL-15-0280. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor.
    • Busch, A. and Kaspari, D.C. 2013. The incidental steward: Reeflc - tions on citizen science. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    • Comber, A., Schade, S., See, L., Mooney, P. and Foody, G. 2014. Semantic analysis of citizen sensing, crowdsourcing and VGI. Paper presented at Connecting a Digital Europe through Location and Place. Proceedings of the AGILE 2014 International Conference on Geographic Information Science, Castellón.
    • Conrad, C.C. and Hilchey, K.G. 2011. A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: Issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 176(1-4): 273-291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5
    • Cooper, C.B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T. and Bonney, R. 2007. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12(2): 11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02197-120211
    • Cooper, C.B., Shirk, J. and Zuckerberg, B. 2014. The invisible prevalence of citizen science in global research: Migratory birds and climate change. PloS One, 9(9): e106508. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0106508
    • Crall, A.W., Jordan, R., Holfelder, K., Newman, G.J., Graham, J. and Waller, D.M. 2013. The impacts of an invasive species citizen science training program on participant attitudes, behavior, and science literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 22(6): 745-764. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662511434894
    • Dickinson, J.L., Shirk, J., Bonter, D., Bonney, R., Crain, R.L., Martin, J., Purcell, K., et al. 2012. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6): 291-297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1890/110236
    • Dickinson, J.L., Zuckerberg, B. and Bonter, D.N. 2010. Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 41: 149-172. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144636
    • Dillman, D.A., Smyth, J.D. and Christian, L.M. 2008. Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys. New York, NY: Wiley.
    • Evans, C., Abrams, E., Reitsma, R., Roux, K., Salmonsen, L. and Marra, P.P. 2005. The Neighborhood Nestwatch Program: Participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conservation Biology, 19(3): 589-594. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523- 1739.2005.00s01.x
    • Finn, P.G., Udy, N.S., Baltais, S.J., Price, K. and Coles, L. 2010. Assessing the quality of seagrass data collected by community volunteers in Moreton Bay Marine Park, Australia. Environmental Conservation, 37(01): 83-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892910000251
    • Follett, R. and Strezov, V. 2015. An analysis of citizen science based research: Usage and publication patterns. PloS ONE, 10(11). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0143687
    • Irani, L. 2004. Understanding gender and confidence in CS course culture. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(1): 195-199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1028174.971371
    • Jenkins, E.W. 1999. School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science, International Journal of Science Education, 21(7): 703-710. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/095006999290363
    • Jordan, R.C., Gray, S.A., Howe, D.V., Brooks, W.R. and Ehrenfeld, J.G. 2011. Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conservation Biology, 25(6): 1148-1154. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x
    • Koss, R., Miller, K., Wescott, G., Boxshall, A., Bellgrove, A., Gilmour, P., Bunce, A., McBurnie, J. and Ierodiaconou, D. 2009. An evaluation of Sea Search as a citizen science programme in Marine Protected Areas. Pacific Con - servation Biology 15: 116-127. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1071/PC090116
    • Kremen, C., Ullmann, K.S. and Thorp, R.W. 2011. Evaluating the quality of citizen-scientist data on pollinator communities. Conservation Biology, 25: 607-617. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01657.x
    • Lewandowski, E. and Oberhauser, K.S. 2017. Butterfly citizen scientists in the United States increase their engagement in conservation. Biological Conservation, 208: 106-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.07.029
    • Lewandowski, E. and Specht, H. 2015. Influence of volunteer and project characteristics on data quality of biological surveys. Conservation Biology, 29(3): 713-723. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12481
    • Martin, V.Y., Christidis, L. and Pecl, G.T. 2016. Public interest in marine citizen science: Is there potential for growth? BioScience, 66(8): 683-692. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1093/biosci/biw070
    • McKinley, D.C., Miller-Rushing, A.J., Ballard, H.L., Bonney, R., Brown, H., Evans, D.M., Ryan, S.F., et al. 2015. Investing in citizen science can improve natural resource management and environmental protection. Issues in Ecology, 19.
    • Minnesota State Fair. 2015. Minnesota state fair website. Available at: http://www.mnstatefair.org/ [Last Accessed 27 July 2016].
    • National Science Board. 2012. Science and engineering indicators 2012. (NSB 12-01). Arlington: National Science Foundation.
    • Newman, G., Chandler, M., Clyde, M., McGreavy, B., Haklay, M., Ballard, H., Gallo, J., et al. 2017. Leveraging the power of place in citizen science for effective conservation decision making. Biological Conservation, 208: 55-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.07.019
    • Rayner, S. 2003. Democracy in the age of assessment: Reflections on the roles of expertise and democracy in public-sector decision making. Science and Public Policy, 30(3): 163-170. DOI: https://doi. org/10.3152/147154303781780533
    • Riesch, H. and Potter, C. 2014. Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science, 23(1): 107-120. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1177/0963662513497324
    • Russell, S.A. 2014. Diary of a citizen scientist: Chasing tiger beetles and other new ways of engaging the world. Corvalis: Oregon State University Press.
    • Savan, B., Morgan, A.J. and Gore, C. 2003. Volunteer environmental monitoring and the role of the universities: The case of Citizens' Environment Watch. Environmental management, 31(5): 0561-0568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-002-2897-y
    • Shanley, P. and Lopez, C. 2009. Out of the loop: Why research rarely reaches policy makers and the public and what can be done. Biotropica, 41(5): 535-544. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7429.2009.00561.x
    • Shirk, J.L., Ballard, H.L., Wilderman, C.C., Phillips, T., Wiggins, A., Jordan, R., Bonney, R., et al. 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
    • Stocklmayer, S.M., Rennie, L.J. and Gilbert, J.K. 2010. The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education, Studies in Science Education, 46(1): 1-44. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1080/03057260903562284
    • U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. Overview of race and hispanic origin: 2010. No. C2010BR-02. U.S. Census Bureau.
    • How to cite this article: Lewandowski, E., Caldwell, W., Elmquist, D. and Oberhauser, K. 2017 Public Perceptions of Citizen
    • Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 2(1): 3, pp. 1-9, DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.77
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
    73
    73%
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information Ok