Abstract Citizen science is a growing phenomenon. With millions of people involved and billions of in-kind dollars contributed annually, this broad extent, fine grain approach to data collection should be garnering enthusiastic support in the mainstream science and higher education communities. However, many academic researchers demonstrate distinct biases against the use of citizen science as a source of rigorous information. To engage the public in scientific research, and the research community in the practice of citizen science, a mutual understanding is needed of accepted quality standards in science, and the corresponding specifics of project design and implementation when working with a broad public base. We define a science-based typology focused on the degree to which projects deliver the type(s) and quality of data/work needed to produce valid scientific outcomes directly useful in science and natural resource management. Where project intent includes direct contribution to science and the public is actively involved either virtually or hands-on, we examine the measures of quality assurance (methods to increase data quality during the design and implementation phases of a project) and quality control (post hoc methods to increase the quality of scientific outcomes). We suggest that high quality science can be produced with massive, largely one-off, participation if data collection is simple and quality control includes algorithm voting, statistical pruning and/or computational modeling. Small to mid-scale projects engaging participants in repeated, often complex, sampling can advance quality through expert-led training and well-designed materials, and through independent verification. Both approaches – simplification at scale and complexity with care – generate more robust science outcomes. © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology. All rights reserved. For permissions please email: firstname.lastname@example.org. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/about_us/legal/notices)
Integrative and Comparative Biology – Oxford University Press
Published: May 21, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera