2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.spasta.2012.03.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assuring the quality of volunteered geographic information

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
526
0
12

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 650 publications
(543 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
5
526
0
12
Order By: Relevance
“…Tortato and Izzo (2016) suggest that this mismatch may result from incompleteness of the version of the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) that was used in our global analysis (from August 2013). While we are aware that remotely sensed imagery, GIS datasets, and social media data applied at the global scale may have limitations due to issues of spatial resolution, accuracy, and completeness (Goodchild and Quattrochi 1997, Kerr and Ostrovsky 2003, Goodchild and Li 2012, we disagree with Tortato and Izzo's observation. We show below in a detailed local-scale analysis that the visitation hotpots in Brazil's Pantanal region, as identified in our global analysis (Levin et al 2015), are indeed unprotected, supporting our original paper.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Tortato and Izzo (2016) suggest that this mismatch may result from incompleteness of the version of the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) that was used in our global analysis (from August 2013). While we are aware that remotely sensed imagery, GIS datasets, and social media data applied at the global scale may have limitations due to issues of spatial resolution, accuracy, and completeness (Goodchild and Quattrochi 1997, Kerr and Ostrovsky 2003, Goodchild and Li 2012, we disagree with Tortato and Izzo's observation. We show below in a detailed local-scale analysis that the visitation hotpots in Brazil's Pantanal region, as identified in our global analysis (Levin et al 2015), are indeed unprotected, supporting our original paper.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Van Exel and Dias [14] presented a method to determine both user reputation and trustworthiness information using user experience, local knowledge and contribution lineage, etc. Goodchild and Li [15] analyzed the crowdsourcing, social, and geographic approaches to assure VGI quality.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The following chapter presents an important overview and study of the social moderation process, which is at the heart of the quality assessment for the GMU-GcT, and represents one of the principle quality assessment techniques outlined by Goodchild and Li (2012) for geocrowdsourcing applications. 63…”
Section: Mobile Field Moderation In the Gmu-gctmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the GMUGcT cannot solely rely on this approach, due to its smaller contributor group. Since the GMU-GcT produces a reasonably small dataset, with an average contribution rate of ten reports per week, we apply what Goodchild and Li (2012) 65 refer to as the social approach to geocrowdsourced quality assessment. This approach relies on a group of team leaders to act as moderators in validating incoming data.…”
Section: Social Moderation For Crowdsourced Geospatial Datamentioning
confidence: 99%