The Wabash Sampling Blitz: A Study on the Effectiveness of Citizen
                        Science

Muenich, Rebecca Logsdon; Peel, Sara; Bowling, L. C.; Haas, Megan; Turco, Ronald F.; Frankenberger, Jane; Chaubey, Indrajeet

doi:10.5334/cstp.1

Cited by 19 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparable to crowdsourcing (Buckingham Shum et al 2012), participation in a contributory project requires minimal cognition on the part of the volunteer, but such projects can produce data that cover wide spatial and temporal scales. A contemporary example of contributory projects are 'blitz' events, which aim to collect as much data as possible about a particular area in a constrained period of time (Muenich et al 2016).…”

Section: Contributorymentioning

confidence: 99%

How citizen scientists can enrich freshwater science as contributors, collaborators, and co-creators

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The involvement of volunteers in aspects of freshwater research and monitoring has a long history. However, the advent of smart technology and access to the internet has opened up the possibility of mass public participation in science, termed citizen science. The potential of citizen science to generate data over wider spatial and temporal scales than conventional approaches is well recognized. However, as the field of citizen science has matured, more attention is being given to the participant journey, and how practitioners can maximize engagement. The papers in this special series on citizen science and freshwater are collected from a range of initiatives, with each study operating in different environments and engaging with citizens with contrasting socioeconomic circumstances. Many of the studies result in insights into freshwater biodiversity (e.g., amphibians, fish, wetland birds), whereas others explore the abiotic environment (e.g., water quality, flow regimes). In addition, several papers assess volunteer participation dynamics and provide guidance for those considering the use of citizen science. The use of citizen science in freshwater science is growing and so too is the quality of the scientific outputs. In part, this growth has been caused by a gradual evolution and expansion in the approach, which involves volunteers as contributors, collaborators, and co-creators. This flexibility holds great promise for opening a new source of valuable freshwater data and knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Contributorymentioning

confidence: 99%

How citizen scientists can enrich freshwater science as contributors, collaborators, and co-creators

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Programs were eager for volunteer-collected data to be considered trustworthy in community disputes, governance and policy settings, and/or peer reviewed journal articles (Dickinson et al 2012;Lewandowski and Specht 2015;Turrini et al 2018). Studies such as those conducted by Fore et al (2001); Muenich et al (2016); and Storey et al (2016) assessed adult volunteers' knowledge and skills related to stream water quality monitoring using different methods, such as comparison groups and one-to-one checks of samples by experts. Across studies, these reports showed that volunteers performed "well enough" or "almost as good" as the standard, which was received with satisfaction by each of the programs.…”

Section: Social Impacts Of Citizen Science Water Monitoring Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social impacts of citizen science water monitoring programs

Grudens-Schuck¹,

Sirajuddin²

2019

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zulham Sirajuddin is a doctoral candidate in agricultural education at Iowa State University and a lecturer at Universitas Ichsan Gorontalo, Indonesia. T he drive to protect and improve surface water quality requires an array of policies, institutions, professionals, and procedures, even in the face of uncertain budgets and an increasing scope of work. Since the 1990s, the concept of "citizen science" has provided a framework under which volunteers supplement the water monitoring duties of scientists by producing more data and, in some cases, expanding their reach (Conrad and Hinchey 2011; McKinley et al. 2017). Volunteers, on the whole, benefit by contributing to society (Lawrence 2006), and by learning about science and environmental issues (Hecker et al. 2018; McKinley et al. 2017; Phillips et al. 2018). Many citizen science programs welcome youth, but this paper focuses on programs for adults. Citizen science programs address many types of science, not just water monitoring. Species monitoring contributes to biodiversity conservation (e.g., bird counts, whale watching, and butterfly migration), and space science and astronomy programs have expanded (Dickinson et al. 2012). Water quality monitoring is considered to be one of the largest activities (Conrad and Hinchey 2011), with program numbers in the United States estimated from 1,675 (Stepenuck 2013) to 1,720 (National Water Quality Monitoring Council 2019). Volunteer water monitoring has provided scientists with more data, and from more locations, than originally hoped (Conrad and Hinchey 2011). Data produced by citizen science projects have contributed to science knowledge and to policy development on local, state, regional, and national levels (Dickinson et al. 2012; Lubell et al. 2002; McKinley et al. 2017). BACKGROUND: IOWATER This article reports on an investigation of social engagement impacts of Iowater Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring Program, a citizen science water monitoring program. Iowater was a statewide program administered by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) for more than 20 years, which aimed to (a) involve the

show abstract

“…Many volunteer monitoring datasets are not fully utilized, especially in their entirety, by professionals and scientists (Penrose and Call 1995;Fore et al 2001;Hoyer et al 2012;Safford and Peters 2017). Perceptions about the accuracy of volunteer data, as well as applicability of the data, may be two of the main reasons for this lack of use (Dyer et al 2014;Muenich et al 2016). In the survey conducted by Burgess et al 2016, scientists were asked what methods they required of a citizen science program to make the resulting data useful to them, and the topranked choices all related to data quality and included documentation of sample location, verifiability, and inperson training by an expert.…”

Section: Citizen Science Water Monitoring Programsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 15 studies focused specifically on water quality physical and chemical parameters (e.g., bacteria, DO, pH, temperature, conductivity,) and are included in this review (Obrecht et al 1998;Au et al 2000;Canfield et al 2002;Nicholson et al 2002;Loperfido et al 2010;Sarnelle et al 2010;Stepenuck et al 2011;Hoyer et al 2012;Coates 2013;Shelton 2013;Stepenuck 2013;Dyer et al 2014;Muenich et al 2016;Storey et al 2016;Stafford and Peters 2017). Unlike indicator species data, these parameters are often monitored by professionals and volunteers using similar equipment and sampling protocols.…”

Section: Water Monitoring Data Accuracy: Comparison Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From these 12 studies we next identified those that did not utilize datasets already in existence from an active volunteer water quality monitoring program, a total of six ( Table 1). Two of these studies, Shelton (2013) and Muenich et al (2016), did not use an existing program but instead recruited and trained volunteers specifically for the comparison study and, as with the bacteria studies, also compared different sampling methods between volunteers and professionals. The other four studies (Canfield et al 2002;Hoyer et al 2012;Stepenuck 2013;Storey et al 2016) did use already active volunteer water quality monitoring programs to collect data, but only for sampling events that were part of the experimental design of the study.…”

Section: Water Quality Parameter Comparison Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Usability of Existing Volunteer Water Monitoring Data: What Can the Literature Tell Us?

Albus

Thompson

Mitchell³

2019

Citizen Science: Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For decades citizen science has been used in environmental monitoring, and perhaps most commonly in water quality monitoring, as a tool to supplement professional data. Hundreds of volunteer monitoring efforts have generated datasets that cover large geographic areas over multiple years, and these largescale datasets have been shown to be especially valuable for monitoring changes over time. Although volunteer water monitoring programs continue to grow worldwide, research shows that many of the existing datasets are still underutilized due to concerns about the accuracy of volunteer-collected data. An increasing number of "comparison studies" have attempted to address quality concerns by comparing volunteer data to professional data to assess relative accuracy, and the majority have reported that volunteer data are of a quality comparable to professional data. Nearly all of these studies, however, focused on a small subset of volunteer program data or data collected under experimental controls, and as such the results may not be applicable to existing, large-scale datasets with unknown controls and high levels of variation. Through a comprehensive look at water quality comparison studies to date, this review reveals a need for additional studies that specifically address the quality of highly variable, large-scale volunteer datasets and ultimately serve as a framework by which decades of volunteer efforts already in existence across the country can be better utilized.

show abstract

The Wabash Sampling Blitz: A Study on the Effectiveness of Citizen Science

Cited by 19 publications

References 54 publications

How citizen scientists can enrich freshwater science as contributors, collaborators, and co-creators

How citizen scientists can enrich freshwater science as contributors, collaborators, and co-creators

Social impacts of citizen science water monitoring programs

Usability of Existing Volunteer Water Monitoring Data: What Can the Literature Tell Us?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About