Literature DB >> 32216157

Citizen science in ecology: a place for humans in nature.

Frederick R Adler1,2, Austin M Green1, Çağan H Şekercioğlu1,3,4.   

Abstract

By involving the public, citizen science runs against the grain of an idealized science that leaves out the human element, and thus provides new opportunities for ecological research and society. We classify the goals of citizen science in ecology and environment into four broad categories: (1) scientific, (2) participant benefits, (3) community, and (4) policy. Although none of these goals have been well studied, we review the literature showing that these projects are most effective in tracking ecological trends over large swaths of space and time, and discuss the challenges of recruiting, training, retaining, and educating participants, maintaining and disseminating high-quality data, and connecting with the larger community and policy. Biomedical studies, where patients participate in their own treatment in randomized trials, provide an interesting comparison with citizen science in ecology, sharing challenges in recruitment and involvement of nonscientists and ethical conduct of research. Future study will help address the ethical difficulties and enhance ways for citizen science in ecology and the environment to complement scientific discovery, involve and educate the public, and guide policy founded in science and the local community.
© 2020 New York Academy of Sciences.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biomedical science; citizen science; ecology; environment

Year:  2020        PMID: 32216157     DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci        ISSN: 0077-8923            Impact factor:   5.691


  3 in total

1.  Shifts in bird ranges and conservation priorities in China under climate change.

Authors:  Ruocheng Hu; Yiyun Gu; Mei Luo; Zhi Lu; Ming Wei; Jia Zhong
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Applying citizen science to engage families affected by ovarian cancer in developing genetic service outreach strategies.

Authors:  Colleen M McBride; Gavin P Campbell; Jingsong Zhao; Rebecca D Pentz; Cam Escoffery; Michael Komonos; Kelly Cannova; Janice L B Byrne; Nancy M Paris; James R Shepperd; Yue Guan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Errors in aerial survey count data: Identifying pitfalls and solutions.

Authors:  Kayla L Davis; Emily D Silverman; Allison L Sussman; R Randy Wilson; Elise F Zipkin
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 2.912

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.