ArticleDiversity2021
How Do Young Community and Citizen Science Volunteers Support Scientific Research on Biodiversity? The Case of iNaturalist.
Article in Diversity, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital technologies in ethnobiology and ethnoecology: methodological opportunities, ethical challenges, and participatory implications.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2026Review
- Investigating the Spatial Biases and Temporal Trends in Insect Pollinator Occurrence Data on GBIF.Insects · 2025Article
- Application of Citizen Science to Sheep as a Model to Sensitize Young Citizens to Biodiversity, Animal Welfare and the Social Utility of Research.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Biodiversity insights from BioBlitz Surveys on Terceira Island, Azores.Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- Protected insect species in Italy: occurrence data from a 10-year citizen science initiative.Biodiversity data journal · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence correctly classifies developmental stages of monarch caterpillars enabling better conservation through the use of community science photographs.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Citizen Science and Multimedia Didactic Resources: Knowledge of Mosquito-Borne Diseases in an Urban Area of Southwestern Colombia.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2024Article
- Young people in iNaturalist: a blended learning framework for biodiversity monitoring.International journal of science education. Part B. Communication and public engagement · 2024Article
- More than a Bit of Fun: The Multiple Outcomes of a Bioblitz.Bioscience · 2023Review
- When the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence:PhytoKeys · 2023Article
- Citizen science expanding knowledge: a new record of the lizardBiodiversity data journal · 2023Article
- The state of online citizen science in Mongolia and its potential for environmental challenges.PloS one · 2023Article
- Online Community and Citizen Science supports environmental science learning by young people.Computers & education · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Online community and citizen science (CCS) projects have broadened access to scientific research and enabled different forms of participation in biodiversity research; however, little is known about whether and how such opportunities are taken up by young people (aged 5-19). Furthermore, when they do participate, there is little research on whether their online activity makes a tangible contribution to scientific research. We addressed these knowledge gaps using quantitative analytical approaches and visualisations to investigate 249 youths' contributions to CCS on the iNaturalist platform, and the potential for the scientific use of their contributions. We found that nearly all the young volunteers' observations were 'verifiable' (included a photo, location, and date/time) and therefore potentially useful to biodiversity research. Furthermore, more than half were designated as 'Research Grade', with a community agreed-upon identification, making them more valuable and accessible to biodiversity science researchers. Our findings show that young volunteers with lasting participation on the platform and those aged 16-19 years are more likely to have a higher proportion of Research Grade observations than younger, or more ephemeral participants. This study enhances our understanding of young volunteers' contributions to biodiversity research, as well as the important role professional scientists and data users can play in helping verify youths' contributions to make them more accessible for biodiversity research.
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.