How can you validate environmental data collected by citizen scientists?

Im very sceptical of the value of citizen scientists in my field, ecology/botany. In terms of plant ID, you need a healthy understanding of your limitations. Just reading some of the responses to this question, it is apparent that some seem to underestimate the scope for mis-ID, and over estimate the scope for later correction. I rarely use iNaturalist records as there is little quality assurance - it has become the Instagram of 'science' and in my opinion barely justifies the vast amount of data it creates. 'White noise' is a term that comes to mind. I'm all for including 'citizens' in the scientific process, but under strict supervision and not laissez faire. Bad data, as with bad apples, tends to rot the whole barrel.

When validating environmental data from citizen scientists, our goals are to ensure accuracy and reliability. We achieve this by checking for consistency over time and among different observers. Complete data collection is vital, covering all necessary aspects of the environment. Quality assurance ensures data is error-free and unbiased. Relevance to our research objectives guides our assessment. Transparency in methods and sources is essential for trust. Validation against established datasets or expert review confirms reliability. By meeting these goals and criteria, we ensure the valuable contribution of citizen scientists to environmental monitoring and research.

Based in working experiences I se it very important to choose the right method depends on Project type. The complexity of the data and the required level of accuracy will influence the chosen method. An expert review might be costlier than crowdsourcing while large datasets might require automated or crowdsourced approaches over manual expert review. Implementation of both combined methods can ensure the citizen science projects, quality and credibility of their environmental data.

expert verification has been a promising aproach.Mamny times ,Experts who review the data submitted by citizen scientistscan surely help in bettering the quality of some data and correctness. I think,as catefull environamenatl experts,we also should Develop a system for screening and validating observations submitted by the public whenever we receive their inputs.

Validating data from a single or several citizen scientist is not practical without reproducing the collection event(s). The value of citizen scientists and their data is in the creation of leads/breadcrumbs that scientists can use to identify the best locations to invest their time and resources in search of meaningful data. There is real value in the citizen scientists work, if properly assessed, as scientific discovery can be expensive and time consuming. The scientists cant be everywhere testing everything. Using citizen science data to identify the most promising points to test a hypothesis is time and cost savings.

Selecting the right methods and tools for collecting environmental data is crucial to ensure its validity and reliability when gathered by citizen scientists. By carefully choosing appropriate methods and providing adequate training and support to participants, you can enhance the quality and credibility of the collected data.

é sempre interessante para validar dados um bom banco de dados. Além disso ter outra pessoa que possa contribuir com uma revis?o ou um teste de tratamento é uma forma de dar mais robustez aos mesmos.

In my experience, validating environmental data collected by citizen scientists requires choosing appropriate methods and tools. I believe that selecting validated protocols and utilizing reliable measurement instruments are crucial. I've found that providing training and guidance on data collection techniques ensures accuracy and consistency. Additionally, implementing quality assurance measures such as data validation algorithms and calibration checks enhances reliability. By choosing the right methods and tools tailored to the specific environmental parameters, citizen science initiatives can produce high-quality data that meets scientific standards and contributes meaningfully to environmental research and management.

Through cross-referencing with existing scientific data, conducting quality assurance checks, verifying measurement methods, ensuring data consistency and accuracy. Additionally, implementing data validation protocols and providing training and support to citizen scientists to enhance data collection based on the good or criteria needed.

From my perspective, technology aids like mobile apps can be transformative in citizen science projects. They not only streamline the data collection process but also enhance the accuracy of the data through built-in validation features. For instance, GPS functionality can ensure location accuracy, while time-stamping can verify the timing of data collection. Additionally, some apps can guide users through the data entry process, reducing the likelihood of errors. This technological empowerment can lead to a more engaged citizen scientist community and richer, more reliable data sets for environmental research.

In order to validate Data collected by citizen scientists, the methodology through which the data was collected and the performance/reliability of data collection instruments including their limitations should be checked for accuracy, the number of sampling sites must be representative and attested to be a true reflection of realities. Limitations to data collection must be considered. Usually, the existence of data verification guidelines, eases the process, if not, one should be developed in a participatory manner and used. Where possible, random sampling can be done respecting similar processes/methods used for collection of data being verified/validated. This also include the environmental conditions under which the data was collected.

é de extrema importancia sempre que possível fornecer apoio, feedbacks e auxilio para as pessoas que coletam dados. Além de elas participarem da pesquisa se tornam mais eficientes e engajadas diminuindo muitos erros ao longo do tempo.

Trained participants are empowered with knowledge and skills to get the work done. Training has proven to help achieve the key objectives of data collection alongside saving time. The participants clearly know what to look for and this increases their creativity in getting the job done. Providing continuous technical and social support also empowers the participants to focus on what's important.

A valida??o de dados coletados por cientistas cidad?os é um pilar crucial na pesquisa ambiental, essa prática n?o só assegura a integridade dos dados, mas também valoriza as contribui??es vitais dos participantes. A documenta??o detalhada do processo de valida??o, incluindo métodos, ferramentas, suposi??es e limita??es, é essencial para estabelecer a confiabilidade dos dados. Ao comunicar claramente o nível de precis?o e as potenciais incertezas, promovemos um entendimento mais profundo das nossas análises e conclus?es. Utilizar visualiza??es e painéis interativos para exibir dados validados amplifica o impacto e a compreens?o dos nossos esfor?os, sublinhando o valor da ciência participativa.

A pesquisa de campo e ciência cidad? podem ser parecidas mas s?o totalmente diferentes. Diferente dos pesquisadores, cientistas cidad?os nem sempre est?o checando relatórios, livros e artigos. A prepara??o da comunica??o pode ser feita ainda durante a coleta, pegando um contato para informar os resultados ou posteriormente com os participantes. A integridade dos dados é parte obrigatória, das contribui??es. A documenta??o detalhada dos processos desde os objetivos, métodos, ferramentas, suposi??es e limita??es, é essencial para estabelecer a confiabilidade de todo o trabalho elaborado. Quanto a integra??o vai depender do escopo elaborado.

Todo trabalho científico deve ser publicado para que sejam disponibilizados ao público (pesquisadores ou estudantes) como forma de colocá-lo para ampla discuss?o ou cita??o em outros trabalhos. Os resultados de um projeto sempre impulsionam mudan?as, geram benefícios, podendo até permitir a agrega??o de valor de negócios. Um dois itens, que comp?em a base da avalia??o de um curso de mestrado/doutorado, leva em conta a produ??o científica dos docentes e discentes, que é a comunica??o dos resultados.

Data collected by citizen scientists plays a crucial role in advancing scientific knowledge, informing decision-making, and addressing environmental challenges. It empowers communities, promotes collaboration between scientists and citizens, and enables collective action towards a more sustainable future. However, it's important to validate this data to ensure its reliability and suitability for scientific analysis. Validation involves training on data collection protocols, QAQC measures, and cross-validation with professional methods. Utilising specialised tools and peer review processes ensures accuracy and reliability. Community engagement is also important to foster transparency and collaboration.

I don’t want to appear cynical, but given the emotion that surrounds environmental issues, I believe that (1) the only way to validate claims and measurements made by so called citizen scientists is to use professionals and (2) be through in using statistical methods to identify where unusual targetting of locations or companies is taking place and where (1) needs to be focused.

The trend to democratisation of everything incl. scientific data collection can only end in tears. I'm reminded of Mao's Cultural Revolution - doctors purged & operations were conducted by the nurses. With predictable results (although citizen scientists in charge then clearly failed to predict it). Would you support an iSurgeon/iEngineer? Probably not. Citizen science shouldn't undermine real expertise, but it is. iNaturalist 'influencers' claim themselves experts. Expertise, gained by thorough, exhaustive, patient study over decades, loses its lustre when weekend warriors & those w/ little experience can be scientists overnight. Citizen science must be scientific (strictly supervised by professional scientists) or its just white noise.

A correria do dia-a-dia muitas vezes limitam a nossa participa??o em processos que deveríamos considerar primordiais, como é o caso da correta separa??o e descarte de blister pack. E n?o me refiro a atua??o como simples cidad?o, mas sim uma atua??o como agente voluntário e de cientistas cidad?os, que podem contribuir identificando novas formas de capta??o e consolida??o. Feita de maneira correta, a descaracteriza??o de blister pack gera um material de grande valor agregado e grande uso na indústria, como o PVC e o Alumínio, que atualmente s?o desperdi?ados entre os mais de 20% destes materiais que acabam sendo descartados de maneira incorreta. Identificar e apoiar o fluxo correto de destina??o pode ser um grande gerador de recursos.

A ciência cidad? permite a coleta de dados que muitas vezes n?o s?o t?o fáceis de serem obtidos. é interessante em estudos ambientais uma integra??o aos moldes comuns para uma cria??o de documenta??o mais completa.