Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36215274›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

I'm fine with collecting data: Engagement profiles differ depending on scientific activities in an online community of a citizen science project.

Till Bruckermann, Hannah Greving, Milena Stillfried, Anke Schumann, Miriam Brandt, Ute Harms

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Till BruckermannInstitute of Education, Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8789-8276
Hannah GrevingLeibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien (IWM), Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5487-9506
Milena StillfriedLeibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Berlin, Germany.
Anke SchumannLeibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Berlin, Germany.
Miriam BrandtLeibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW), Berlin, Germany.
Ute HarmsIPN-Leibniz Institute for Science and Mathematics Education, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Digital technologies facilitate collaboration between citizens and scientists in citizen science (CS) projects. Besides the facilitation of data transmission and access, digital technologies promote novel formats for education in CS by including citizens in the process of collecting, analyzing, and discussing data. It is usually assumed that citizens profit more from CS the more they participate in the different steps of the scientific process. However, it has so far not been analyzed whether citizens actually engage in these steps. Therefore, we investigated citizens' actual engagement in different scientific steps online (i.e., data collection and data analysis) in two field studies of a CS project. We then compared them with other CS projects. We analyzed behavioral engagement patterns of N = 273 participants with activity logs and cluster analyses. Opportunities to engage in different steps of the scientific process increased participants' overall commitment compared to contributory CS projects. Yet, despite their increased commitment, participants' engagement was only more active for data collection but not for data analysis. We discuss how participants' perceived role as data collectors influenced their actual engagement in the scientific steps. To conclude, citizens may need support to change their role from data collectors to data inquirers.

Indexed as

Citizen ScienceHumans

Identifiers

PMID36215274
PMCPMC9551629

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.