Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35873351›Full record

ArticleDiversity2021

How Do Young Community and Citizen Science Volunteers Support Scientific Research on Biodiversity? The Case of iNaturalist.

Maria Aristeidou, Christothea Herodotou, Heidi L Ballard, Lila Higgins, Rebecca F Johnson, Annie E Miller, Alison N Young, Lucy D Robinson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Young people in iNaturalist: a blended learning framework for biodiversity monitoring.International journal of science education. Part B. Communication and public engagement · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Maria AristeidouInstitute of Educational Technology, The Open University, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire MK7 6AA, UK.
Christothea HerodotouInstitute of Educational Technology, The Open University, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire MK7 6AA, UK.
Heidi L BallardCenter for Community and Citizen Science, UC Davis School of Education, University of California Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Lila HigginsNatural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA 90007, USA.
Rebecca F JohnsonCalifornia Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA.
Annie E MillerCalifornia Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA.
Alison N YoungCalifornia Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, CA 94118, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8919-0661
Lucy D RobinsonNatural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, UK.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206202
6 · The paper itself

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

biodiversitycitizen sciencecommunity sciencedata qualityiNaturalistonline participationyoung volunteers

Identifiers

PMID35873351
PMCPMC7613115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.