Citizen Science in Archaeology

Abstract

Citizen science, as a process of volunteer participation through crowdsourcing, facilitates the creation of mass data sets needed to address subtle and large-scale patterns in complex phenomena. Citizen science efforts in other field disciplines such as biology, geography, and astronomy indicate how new web-based interfaces can enhance and expand upon archaeologists’ existing platforms of volunteer engagement such as field schools, community archaeology, site stewardship, and professional–avocational partnerships. Archaeological research can benefit from the citizen science paradigm in four ways: fieldwork that makes use of widely available technologies such as mobile applications for photography and data upload; searches of large satellite image collections for site identification and monitoring; crowdfunding; and crowdsourced computer entry of heritage data.

Going for the win‐win: including the public in underwater cultural heritage management through citizen science in Australia and New Zealand

“…Scientists striving to obtain data beyond their physical means have embraced a citizen science approach to develop a more geographically comprehensive, if not always statistically robust dataset (Smith, 2014: 749–750). By aligning the role of an archaeological heritage manager to enable public engagement with the need to create value for the community from the archaeological record, the project discussed here proposed to demonstrate the potential of making a useable past for the public (Little, 2002; Smith, 2006) for the benefit of heritage preservation, the divers, and the public good (Jewell, 2004; Edney, 2011; 2012; 2018; Underwood, 2015).…”

“…In Australia, underwater cultural heritage (UCH) management agencies have existed since the late 1970s and initially deliberately focussed on creating opportunity for the public to interact with UCH. This approach has become an increasing trend in heritage in world practice (Henderson, 1994: 6; Little, 2002: 3; Smith and Ehrenhard, 2002: 125; Smith, 2014: 750; North, 2006: 52; Viduka, 2008: 20). However, even with the ongoing public engagement efforts in Australia, and increasingly in New Zealand, today bureaucrats and maritime archaeologists are sometimes considered by members of the public as elites who control access and divorce the public from an active role or control of UCH in the name of statutory compliance or scientific rigour.…”

Predictive Modelling for Archaeological Sites:Ashokan Edicts from the Indian Subcontinent

“…The development of a purpose-specific research project to examine each of the 121 high likelihood areas represents an ideal opportunity for distributed research projects based in local academic institutions in the subcontinent, utilizing the principles of volunteered geographic information (VGI) and citizen science [38][39][40] . We therefore seek to release information about the location of high likelihood areas into the public domain for use by in-country scholars and students.…”

Anthropological Archaeology in 2015: Entanglements, Reflection, Reevaluation, and Archaeology beyond Disciplinary Boundaries

“…Archaeology is well suited to hands‐on learning experiences in the field, laboratory, and classroom (Clarkson and Shipton ), and curriculum reform is a topic that has been extensively discussed for more than 15 years (Bender ; Bender and Smith ). Now, however, a citizen‐science approach, including crowdsourcing and crowdfunding, holds promise for resolving several challenges in the discipline via volunteerism, increased input from descendant communities, and broadened research programs (Smith ). These phenomena illustrate a remarkable shift of power from traditional peer review and funding models, and they hold great potential to direct archaeological agendas of the future.…”