ArticleNeotropical entomology2020
Why the views of Latin American Scientists on Citizen Science as a Tool for Pollinator Monitoring and Conservation Matter?
Article in Neotropical entomology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insect Pollinators, Major Threats and Mitigation Measures.Neotropical entomology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Pollinators are threatened all over the planet; scientific data about the status of them is essential for planning conservation and impact mitigation. Appropriate methods and costs for monitoring are being discussed and non-scientist participation in data collection in citizen science (CS) projects is a very promising option. However, there is criticism regarding the quality of data gathered by non-scientists and their real contribution to scientific research, which makes the engagement of scientists in these projects crucial for data verification and validation and training volunteers. CS is still poorly spread in Latin America, so in order to propose strategies to engage scientists, it is necessary to understand the attitude of these professionals towards CS and their interests in engaging in it. To this end, we conducted a survey with 96 biodiversity scientists based in five Latin American countries. In general, the respondents have a very favorable attitude towards CS, although only a small percentage of them are engaged in CS projects. Obtaining data for scientific research is the scientists' main interest in CS, although some of them have also expressed more altruistic reasons for engaging in CS related to ethical and social values. Our paper also suggests five interrelated strategies that can be taken to engage scientists in CS, covering the following: (a) create funding lines to support projects, (b) include extension and outreach activities in the system of scientists' evaluation, (c) promote an inter and transdisciplinary infrastructure, (d) promote scientists' building capacities in CS, and (e) encourage scientists to do science communication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.