The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Crowdsourcing, Citizen Science or Volunteered Geographic Information? The Current State of Crowdsourced Geographic Information
Open accessAbstract
Citizens are increasingly becoming an important source of geographic information, sometimes entering domains that had until recently been the exclusive realm of authoritative agencies. This activity has a very diverse character as it can, amongst other things, be active or passive, involve spatial or aspatial data and the data provided can be variable in terms of key attributes such as format, description and quality. Unsurprisingly, therefore, there are a variety of terms used to describe data arising from citizens. In this article, the expressions used to describe citizen sensing of geographic information are reviewed and their use over time explored, prior to categorizing them and highlighting key issues in the current state of the subject. The latter involved a review of ~100 Internet sites with particular focus on their thematic topic, the nature of the data and issues such as incentives for contributors. This review suggests that most sites involve active rather than passive contribution, with citizens typically motivated by the desire to aid a worthy cause, often receiving little training. As such, this article provides a snapshot of the role of citizens in crowdsourcing geographic information and a guide to the current status of this rapidly emerging and evolving subject.
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
Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases
Agrawal, R., Imieliński, T., & Swami, A. (1993) · Proceedings of the 1993 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data · doi:10.1145/170035.170072 · Cited by 14,907
Chandola, V., Banerjee, A., & Kumar, V. (2009) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/1541880.1541882 · Cited by 11,687
Cited by
Flood Risk in Urban Areas: Modelling, Management and Adaptation to Climate Change. A Review
Cea, L., & Costabile, P. (2022) · Hydrology · doi:10.3390/hydrology9030050 · Cited by 317
Generating WUDAPT Level 0 data – Current status of production and evaluation
Bechtel, B., Alexander, P. J., Beck, C., Böhner, J., Brousse, O., Ching, J., Demuzere, M., Fonte, C., Gál, T., Hidalgo, J., et al. (2019) · Urban Climate · doi:10.1016/j.uclim.2018.10.001 · Cited by 285
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- See, L., Mooney, P., Foody, G., Bastin, L., Comber, A., Estima, J., Fritz, S., Kerle, N., Jiang, B., Laakso, M., Liu, H.-Y., Milčinski, G., Nikšič, M., Painho, M., Pődör, A., Olteanu-Raimond, A.-M., & Rutzinger, M.
- Venue
- ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2016-04-27
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 55
- ISSN
- 2220-9964 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3102725001
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 348.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Crowdsourcing, Citizen Science or Volunteered Geographic Information? The Current State of Crowdsourced Geographic Information. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/ijgi5050055
- The paper
- See, L., Mooney, P., Foody, G., Bastin, L., Comber, A., Estima, J., Fritz, S., Kerle, N., Jiang, B., Laakso, M., Liu, H.-Y., Milčinski, G., Nikšič, M., Painho, M., Pődör, A., Olteanu-Raimond, A.-M., & Rutzinger, M. (2016). Crowdsourcing, Citizen Science or Volunteered Geographic Information? The Current State of Crowdsourced Geographic Information. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi5050055
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.