ArticlePloS one2021
Exploring the participation of young citizen scientists in scientific research: The case of iNaturalist.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- EyeInvaS: Lowering Barriers to Public Participation in Invasive Alien Species Monitoring Through Deep Learning.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Incorporating citizen science into IUCN Red List assessments.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Bridging Citizen Science and Expert Surveys in urban biodiversity monitoring: Insights from insect diversity in Macao.Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- Citizen Science and Multimedia Didactic Resources: Knowledge of Mosquito-Borne Diseases in an Urban Area of Southwestern Colombia.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- A Method for Conveying Confidence in iNaturalist Observations: A Case Study Using Non-Native Marine Species.Ecology and evolution · 2024Article
- Application of citizen science with the nationwide bird census.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Young people in iNaturalist: a blended learning framework for biodiversity monitoring.International journal of science education. Part B. Communication and public engagement · 2024Article
- Conservation tools: the next generation of engineering-biology collaborations.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023Review
- Aliens on the Road: Surveying Wildlife Roadkill to Assess the Risk of Biological Invasion.Biology · 2023Article
- Temporal stability of the hybrid zone betweenEcology and evolution · 2023Article
- The state of online citizen science in Mongolia and its potential for environmental challenges.PloS one · 2023Article
- Article
- Citizen Science Mosquito Surveillance by Ad Hoc Observation Using the iNaturalist Platform.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Identifying engaging bird species and traits with community science observations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- How Do Young Community and Citizen Science Volunteers Support Scientific Research on Biodiversity? The Case of iNaturalist.Diversity · 2021Article
- Step by step towards citizen science - deconstructing youth participation in BioBlitzes.JCOM, Journal of science communication · 2021Article
- Getting science priorities straight: how to increase the reliability of specimen identification?Biology letters · 2021Article
- Article
- The true colours of the Formidable Pygmy Grasshopper (ZooKeys · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online citizen science projects have broadened options for accessing science and enabled different forms of participation in scientific research for adult and young volunteers. Yet, little is known regarding participation patterns among youth participants. Quantitative approaches were used to investigate the contribution of 183 young volunteers to citizen science on the iNaturalist platform and the participation behaviour that relates to their contribution. The participants accessed and used iNaturalist as part of one-day field-based events (bioblitzes) facilitated by museums. Compared to the observation behaviour of all iNaturalist users, as documented on the platform, the young volunteers observe fewer plants and birds, and more molluscs, arachnids and insects. The average daily contributions of young volunteers were found to be positively associated with a large proportion of active days on iNaturalist and a systematic contribution behaviour, yet negatively related to a long duration on the platform. This study enhances our understanding of young volunteers' contributions to citizen science and provides insights for research on participation in online citizen science. Our findings have implications on how museums design the field-based events to encourage follow-up systematic participation and maintain active contribution.
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.