The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research
Open accessAbstract
The collective impact of humans on biodiversity rivals mass extinction events defining Earth’s history, but does our large population also present opportunities to document and contend with this crisis? We provide the first quantitative review of biodiversity-related citizen science to determine whether data collected by these projects can be, and are currently being, effectively used in biodiversity research. We find strong evidence of the potential of citizen science: within projects we sampled (n = 388), ∼1.3 million volunteers participate, contributing up to $2.5 billion in-kind annually. These projects exceed most federally-funded studies in spatial and temporal extent, and collectively they sample a breadth of taxonomic diversity. However, only 12% of the 388 projects surveyed obviously provide data to peer-reviewed scientific articles, despite the fact that a third of these projects have verifiable, standardized data that are accessible online. Factors influencing publication included project spatial scale and longevity and having publically available data, as well as one measure of scientific rigor (taxonomic identification training). Because of the low rate at which citizen science data reach publication, the large and growing citizen science movement is likely only realizing a small portion of its potential impact on the scientific research community. Strengthening connections between professional and non-professional participants in the scientific process will enable this large data resource to be better harnessed to understand and address global change impacts on biodiversity.
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
General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations
Brooks, S. P., & Gelman, A. (1998) · Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · doi:10.1080/10618600.1998.10474787 · Cited by 6,045
The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection
Pimm, S. L., Jenkins, C. N., Abell, R., Brooks, T. M., Gittleman, J. L., Joppa, L. N., Raven, P. H., Roberts, C. M., & Sexton, J. O. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1246752 · Cited by 3,542
Lintott, C. J., Schawinski, K., Slosar, A., Land, K., Bamford, S., Thomas, D., Raddick, M. J., Nichol, R. C., Szalay, A., Andreescu, D., et al. (2008) · Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2008.13689.x · Cited by 1,488
Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game
Cooper, S., Khatib, F., Treuille, A., Barbero, J., Lee, J., Beenen, M., Leaver-Fay, A., Baker, D., Popović, Z., & players, F. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09304 · Cited by 1,368
Cited by
Linking plant phenology to conservation biology
Morellato, L. P. C., Alberton, B., Alvarado, S. T., Borges, B., Buisson, E., Camargo, M. G. G., Cancian, L. F., Carstensen, D. W., Escobar, D. F. E., Leite, P. T. P., et al. (2016) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.033 · Cited by 423
The science of citizen science: Exploring barriers to use as a primary research tool
Burgess, H. K., DeBey, L. B., Froehlich, H. E., Schmidt, N., Theobald, E. J., Ettinger, A. K., HilleRisLambers, J., Tewksbury, J., & Parrish, J. K. (2017) · Biological Conservation · doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.014 · Cited by 389
Self-citationThe diversity and evolution of ecological and environmental citizen science
Pocock, M. J. O., Tweddle, J. C., Savage, J., Robinson, L. D., & Roy, H. E. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0172579 · Cited by 359
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
Sharing biodiversity data: citizen scientists’ concerns and motivations
Ganzevoort, W., van den Born, R. J. G., Halffman, W., & Turnhout, S. (2017) · Biodiversity and Conservation · doi:10.1007/s10531-017-1391-z · Cited by 133
“Citizen science still deals with a (perceived) ‘‘image problem’’ regarding data quality (Riesch and Potter 2014, p. 113), though steps can be taken to assuage this concern (e.g., Bone et al. 2012; Sullivan et al. 2014; Theobald et al. 2015).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Theobald, E. J., Ettinger, A. K., Burgess, H. K., DeBey, L. B., Schmidt, N. R., Froehlich, H. E., Wagner, C., HilleRisLambers, J., Tewksbury, J., Harsch, M. A., & Parrish, J. K.
- Venue
- Biological Conservation
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-01
- Volume
- 181
- Pages
- 236-244
- ISSN
- 0006-3207 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1985354534
- Cited by
- 770
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 102.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021
- The paper
- Theobald, E. J., Ettinger, A. K., Burgess, H. K., DeBey, L. B., Schmidt, N. R., Froehlich, H. E., Wagner, C., HilleRisLambers, J., Tewksbury, J., Harsch, M. A., & Parrish, J. K. (2015). Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biological Conservation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021
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.
