ArticleScientific reports2025
Stakeholder diversity matters: employing the wisdom of crowds for data-poor fisheries assessments.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Embracing local knowledge is vital to conserve and manage biodiversity, yet frameworks to do so are lacking. We need to understand which, and how many knowledge holders are needed to ensure that management recommendations arising from local knowledge are not skewed towards the most vocal individuals. Here, we apply a Wisdom of Crowds framework to a data-poor recreational catch-and-release fishery, where individuals interact with natural resources in different ways. We aimed to test whether estimates of fishing quality from diverse groups (multiple ages and years of experience), were better than estimates provided by homogenous groups and whether thresholds exist for the number of individuals needed to capture estimates. We found that diversity matters; by using random subsampling combined with saturation principles, we determine that targeting 31% of the survey sample size captured 75% of unique responses. Estimates from small diverse subsets of this size outperformed most estimates from homogenous groups; sufficiently diverse small crowds are just as effective as large crowds in estimating ecological state. We advocate for more diverse knowledge holders in local knowledge research and application.
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.