In most online citizen science projects, a large proportion of participants contribute in small quantities. To investigate how low contributors differ from committed volunteers, we distributed a survey to members of the Old Weather project, followed by interviews with respondents selected according to a range of contribution levels. The studies reveal a complex relationship between motivations and contribution. Whilst high contributors were deeply engaged by social or competitive features, low contributors described a solitary experience of 'dabbling' in projects for short periods. Since the majority of participants exhibit this small-scale contribution pattern, there is great potential value in designing interfaces to tempt lone workers to complete 'just another page', or to lure early drop-outs back into participation. This includes breaking the work into components which can be tackled without a major commitment of time and effort, and providing feedback on the quality and value of these contributions.

Online citizen science projects have demonstrated their usefulness for research, however little is known about the potential benefits for volunteers. We conducted 39 interviews (28 volunteers, 11 researchers) to gain a greater understanding of volunteers' motivations, learning and creativity (MLC). In our MLC model we explain that participating and progressing in a project community provides volunteers with many indirect opportunities for learning and creativity. The more aspects that volunteers are involved in, the more likely they are to sustain their participation in the project. These results have implications for the design and management of online citizen science projects. It is important to provide users with tools to communicate in order to supporting social learning, community building and sharing. AbstractCitizen science; Informal learning; Public engagement with science and technology Keywords

Gamification is increasingly implemented in citizen science projects as a means of motivating and sustaining participation. In a survey and subsequent interviews we explored the appeal of gamification for participants in the Old Weather project, and its impact upon data quality. We found that the same competitive mechanisms which some volunteers found rewarding and motivating were either ignored by other participants, or contributed to a decision to discontinue participation. We also identified an opportunity to use gamification to exploit the narrative appeal of a project such as Old Weather. In contrast to previous citizen science research, much of which focuses on how to support the most active or prolific contributors, we offer new design recommendations which recognise varying levels of engagement with a project.

Government departments and agencies around the world routinely collect administrative data produced by citizen interaction with the state. The UK government increasingly frames data as an 'asset'. The potential in administrative data can be exploited by sharing and linking across datasets, but when the rhetoric of the benefits of data sharing is bound up in commercial exploitation, trustworthy motivations for sharing data come into question. Such questions are framed around two apparently conflicting public goods. The public good in re-using data to increase government efficiency and to enhance research is set against the public good in protecting privacy. Privacy is a collective as well as an individual benefit, enabling the public to participate confidently in citizen-state interactions. Balancing these public goods is challenging given rapidly evolving technology and data science. The analysis presented here draws on research undertaken by the authors as part of the Administrative Data Research Centre in England. Between 2014 and 2017, four case studies were conducted on government administrative data across education, transport, energy and health. The purpose of the research was to examine stakeholder perspectives in relation to administrative data sharing and re-use. The themes of trust, risk and consent were chosen to articulate the research questions and analysis: this article focuses on the findings related to trust. It explores the notion of trust in the collection, analysis, linkage and re-use of routinely collected government administrative data in England. It seeks to demonstrate that securing public trust in data initiatives is dependent on a broader balance of trust between a network of actors involved in data sharing and use.

This article draws on research undertaken by the authors as part of the Administrative Data Research Centre in England (ADRC-E). Between 2014 and 2017, we conducted four case studies on government administrative data for education, transport, energy and health. The purpose of the research was to examine stakeholder perspectives about the sharing, linking and re-use (secondary use) of government administrative data. In relation to the role and nature of consent given by data subjects for re-use, our study revealed significant variations in data provider and researcher attitudes. Although our study setting was England, we believe that the findings have wider resonance. Our analysis identified six factors which might account for the variations around consent: the specificities of the legislative framework governing the collection and processing of particular data; the type of data being collected and the relational context in which it is created; the broader information governance framework in which the data resides; the creating organization's approach to data release; the relative levels of risk aversity within the creating organization; and public perceptions and social attitudes. In conclusion, we consider whether consent is still the best mechanism available for data re-use, or whether a social contract model of data sharing should be developed.