the evolving landscape of citizen science
DESCRIPTION
Presentation for the USGS Community Data Integration workshop on Citizen ScienceTRANSCRIPT
The Evolving Landscape of Citizen Science
Typologies and Implications of Project Design
Andrea WigginsPostdoctoral Fellow
DataONE & Cornell Lab of Ornithology
11 September, 2012
USGS Community Data Integration Workshop on Citizen Science
2
What’s in a name?
Label Research Domain Key Features
Civic science Science communication Public participation in decisions about science
People’s science Political science Social movements for people-centered science
Citizen science Ecology Public participation in scientific research
Volunteer/community-based monitoring
Natural resource management Long-term monitoring and intervention
Participatory action research Behavioral science Researcher & community participation & action
Action science Behavioral science Participatory, emphasizes tacit theories-in-use
Community science Psychology Participatory community-centered social science
Living Labs Management Public-private partnership for innovation
3
What’s in a name?
3
Label Research Domain Key Features
Civic science Science communication Public participation in decisions about science
People’s science Political science Social movements for people-centered science
Citizen science Ecology Public participation in scientific research
Volunteer/community-based monitoring
Natural resource management Long-term monitoring and intervention
Participatory action research Behavioral science Researcher & community participation & action
Action science Behavioral science Participatory, emphasizes tacit theories-in-use
Community science Psychology Participatory community-centered social science
Living Labs Management Public-private partnership for innovation
4
A few typologies
Consultative, functional & collaborative • Lawrence, 2006
Contributory, collaborative, & co-created • CAISE report, 2009
Action, conservation, investigation, virtual, & education•Wiggins & Crowston, 2011
Typologies based on goals & tasks•Wiggins & Crowston, 2012
5
Scientific tasks
6
Framing participation tasks
Sharing my data/experiences• Fits into daily life• People like to share their passions
Working on their/our tasks•New, often unfamiliar tasks• Reinforces us/them divisions
Playing games & solving puzzles• Fits into daily life• Explicit symbolic rewards, entertaining
7
Goals & tasksStatistical clustering based on survey results• Goals more interesting than participation tasks• Academic vs decision-making: science clusters• Localized vs distributed: training & learning materials
8
Other important factors
9
(Relative) pros & cons
Contributory Collaborative Co-Created
Scalability High Varies Low
Technology dependency
High Varies Low
Volunteer management
Low Varies High
Task complexity Low Varies High
Data quality Varies Varies Varies
Sustainability Varies Varies Varies
10
Implications for design
11
Implications for design
Honestly evaluate project resources & goals, work backwards
12
Implications for design
Honestly evaluate project resources & goals, work backwards
Recognize tradeoffs and make choices accordingly
13
Implications for design
Honestly evaluate project resources & goals, work backwards
Recognize tradeoffs and make choices accordingly
Design to address resource constraints
14
Implications for design
Honestly evaluate project resources & goals, work backwards
Recognize tradeoffs and make choices accordingly
Design to address resource constraints
There’s more than one right answer
15
Thanks!
[email protected]@AndreaWiggins
dataone.orgbirds.cornell.educitizenscience.organdreawiggins.com
16
Typologies•Lawrence, A. (2006). “No Personal Motive?” Volunteers, Biodiversity, and the False
Dichotomies of Participation. Ethics, Place & Environment, 9(3), 279-298.•Bonney, R., Ballard, H., Jordan, R., McCallie, E., Phillips, T., Shirk, J., et al. (2009). Public
Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report (Tech. Rep.).
•Danielsen, F., Burgess, N., Balmford, A., Donald, P., Funder, M., Jones, J., et al. (2009). Local participation in natural resource monitoring: a characterization of approaches. Conservation Biology, 23(1), 31–42.
•Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Phillips, T., & Bonney, R. (2007). Citizen Science as a Tool for Conservation in Residential Ecosystems. Ecology and Society, 12(2).
•Wilderman, C. C. (2007). Models of community science: design lessons from the field. Proceedings of Citizen Science Toolkit Conference.
•Wiggins, A. & Crowston, K. (2011). From Conservation to Crowdsourcing: A Typology of Citizen Science. Proceedings of the 44th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
•Wiggins, A. & Crowston, K. (2012). Goals and Tasks: Two Typologies of Citizen Science Projects. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences.