Why do people participate in app-based environment-focused citizen science projects?

Abstract

We investigated the motivations of participants in two environment-focused citizen science projects using an online questionnaire. The questions focused on the reasons for initial engagement and in how far these motivations were fulfilled by participating. The two projects, CrowdWater and Naturkalender (English: Nature’s Calendar), use similar smartphone applications to collect data on water and phenology, respectively. The answers to the individual statements were analyzed based on a categorization framework that was previously used with other citizen science projects. The motivations to participate in the projects were similar for the two projects but there were also some differences. They were altruistic and related to participants’ principles (e.g., to uphold a moral principle, such as through conservation). The main motivations for becoming engaged in the projects were to contribute to science, due to an interest in the project topic, and to protect nature. More CrowdWater respondents were motivated by being asked to participate than Naturkalender respondents. Naturkalender participants and participants in the 50–59-year age group of both projects agreed most to enjoying their participation, being outside and active, and learning something new. More super-users, i.e., users who participated at least once per week, were interested in sharing their knowledge and experience with others than occasional participants. This was particularly true for super-users in Naturkalender. Based on the results of this study, we recommend that to help sustain involvement of the most active participants, projects should focus on recruiting participants who are already interested in the topic, and highlighting opportunities to share knowledge, be outdoors, and contribute to science.

We want you! Recruitment strategies for the success of a citizen science project on urban wildlife ecology

“…In their communication, projects could, for example, highlight the link to the participants' everyday life, which appears to be a strong motivator in our as well as in other studies (Wagenknecht et al, 2021). In contrast, we did not find that contributing to science and learning about science were powerful recruitment messages or motivators, which is counter to a number of other studies (Raddick et al, 2010;Curtis, 2015;Land-Zandstra et al, 2015;Alender, 2016;Land-Zandstra et al, 2016;Lee et al, 2018;Lopez, 2021;Etter et al, 2023). Community building through science communication among participants as well as between participants and scientists has also been described as a success factor for CS projects (Golumbic et al, 2020).…”

Citizen scientists: Unveiling motivations and characteristics influencing initial and sustained participation in an agricultural project

“…By differentiating between participation levels when evaluating project engagement, it becomes possible to explore the distinct drivers underlying each level [15]. Collectively, research efforts have underscored the significance of a desire for learning and understanding, a commitment to conservation, and personal values for motivating participation in environmental citizen science projects [16][17][18][19]. Still, factors that drive people to start participating in a project, can diverge from factors that drive sustained participation in a citizen science project [20][21][22].…”

Demographic and motivational differences between participants in analog and digital citizen science projects for monitoring mosquitoes

“…As the success of projects has been reliant on the recruitment and retention of a diverse set of volunteers, understanding the motivational goals that drive citizen scientists to participate has become increasingly crucial to keeping projects up and running. An extensive list of studies has attempted to elucidate these factors 11 , 18 – 21 . To date, various catalysts of participation have been revealed, including the opportunity to spend time in nature 17 and a primary concern for the environment 22 .…”