The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of volunteered geographic information quality assessment methods
Open accessAbstract
With the ubiquity of advanced web technologies and location-sensing hand held devices, citizens regardless of their knowledge or expertise, are able to produce spatial information. This phenomenon is known as volunteered geographic information (VGI). During the past decade VGI has been used as a data source supporting a wide range of services, such as environmental monitoring, events reporting, human movement analysis, disaster management, etc. However, these volunteer-contributed data also come with varying quality. Reasons for this are: data is produced by heterogeneous contributors, using various technologies and tools, having different level of details and precision, serving heterogeneous purposes, and a lack of gatekeepers. Crowd-sourcing, social, and geographic approaches have been proposed and later followed to develop appropriate methods to assess the quality measures and indicators of VGI. In this article, we review various quality measures and indicators for selected types of VGI and existing quality assessment methods. As an outcome, the article presents a classification of VGI with current methods utilized to assess the quality of selected types of VGI. Through these findings, we introduce data mining as an additional approach for quality handling in VGI.
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
Resnick, P., Kuwabara, K., Zeckhauser, R., & Friedman, E. (2000) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/355112.355122 · Cited by 2,190 · cited 1×
“Resnick et al. (2000) described contributors’ abilities and dispositions as features where this reputation can be based upon.”
Background
Cited by
The world’s user-generated road map is more than 80% complete
Barrington-Leigh, C., & Millard-Ball, A. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0180698 · Cited by 462
Passive crowdsourcing of social media in environmental research: A systematic map
Ghermandi, A., & Sinclair, M. (2019) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.02.003 · Cited by 363
Metadata
- Authors
- Senaratne, H., Mobasheri, A., Ali, A. L., Capineri, C., & Haklay, M. (.
- Venue
- International Journal of Geographical Information Science
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-05-31
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 139-167
- ISSN
- 0269-3798 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-8816
- 1362-3087
- OpenAlex
- W2412667021
- Cited by
- 493
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 361.78
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of volunteered geographic information quality assessment methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13658816.2016.1189556
- The paper
- Senaratne, H., Mobasheri, A., Ali, A. L., Capineri, C., & Haklay, M. (. (2017). A review of volunteered geographic information quality assessment methods. International Journal of Geographical Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2016.1189556
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.