The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assessing data quality in citizen science
Open accessAbstract
Ecological and environmental citizen‐science projects have enormous potential to advance scientific knowledge, influence policy, and guide resource management by producing datasets that would otherwise be infeasible to generate. However, this potential can only be realized if the datasets are of high quality. While scientists are often skeptical of the ability of unpaid volunteers to produce accurate datasets, a growing body of publications clearly shows that diverse types of citizen‐science projects can produce data with accuracy equal to or surpassing that of professionals. Successful projects rely on a suite of methods to boost data accuracy and account for bias, including iterative project development, volunteer training and testing, expert validation, replication across volunteers, and statistical modeling of systematic error. Each citizen‐science dataset should therefore be judged individually, according to project design and application, and not assumed to be substandard simply because volunteers generated it.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Free as in puppies: compensating for ict constraints in citizen science
Wiggins, A. (2013) · Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/2441776.2441942 · Cited by 44
Self-citation
Cited by
Situating Ecology as a Big-Data Science: Current Advances, Challenges, and Solutions
Farley, S. S., Dawson, A., Goring, S. J., & Williams, J. W. (2018) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biy068 · Cited by 331
A Vision for Global Biodiversity Monitoring With Citizen Science
(2018) · Advances in Ecological Research · doi:10.1016/bs.aecr.2018.06.003 · Cited by 228
Bat detective—Deep learning tools for bat acoustic signal detection
Mac Aodha, O., Gibb, R., Barlow, K. E., Browning, E., Firman, M., Freeman, R., Harder, B., Kinsey, L., Mead, G. R., Newson, S. E., et al. (2018) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005995 · Cited by 216
Torney, C. J., Lloyd‐Jones, D. J., Chevallier, M., Moyer, D. C., Maliti, H. T., Mwita, M., Kohi, E. M., & Hopcraft, G. C. (2019) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.13165 · Cited by 110
Species Distribution Modeling for Machine Learning Practitioners: A Review
Beery, S., Cole, E., Parker, J., Perona, P., & Winner, K. (2021) · ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies · doi:10.1145/3460112.3471966 · Cited by 100
Palmer, M. S., Huebner, S. E., Willi, M., Fortson, L., & Packer, C. (2021) · Human Computation · doi:10.15346/hc.v8i2.123 · Cited by 20
“A Cohort of Pirate Ships”: Biomedical Citizen Scientists’ Attitudes Toward Ethical Oversight
Trejo, M., Canfield, I., Brooks, W. B., Pearlman, A., & Guerrini, C. (2021) · Citizen Science: Theory and Practice · doi:10.5334/cstp.360 · Cited by 11
Metadata
- Authors
- Kosmala, M., Wiggins, A., Swanson, A., & Simmons, B.
- Venue
- Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-12
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 551-560
- ISSN
- 1540-9295 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-9309
- OpenAlex
- W2557668118
- Cited by
- 985
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 130.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.