S. Andrew Sheppard
Loren Terveen
ABSTRACT
Citizen science is becoming more valuable as a potential source of environmental data. Involving citizens in data collection has the added educational benefits of increased scientific awareness and local ownership of environmental concerns. However, a common concern among domain experts is the presumed lower quality of data submitted by volunteers. In this paper, we explore data quality assurance practices in River Watch, a community-based monitoring program in the Red River basin. We investigate how the participants in River Watch understand and prioritize data quality concerns. We found that data quality in River Watch is primarily maintained through universal adherence to standard operating procedures, but there remain areas where technological intervention may help. We also found that rigorous data quality assurance practices appear to enhance rather than hinder the educational goals of the program. We draw implications for the design of quality assurance mechanisms for River Watch and other citizen science projects.
- Y. Benkler. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT, USA, 2006. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- B. Butler, E. Joyce, and J. Pike. Don't look now, but we've created a bureaucracy: the nature and roles of policies and rules in wikipedia. In CHI '08, pages 1101--1110, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Conrad and K. Hilchey. A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, pages 1--19, 2010.Google Scholar
- D. Cosley, D. Frankowski, L. Terveen, and J. Riedl. Using intelligent task routing and contribution review to help communities build artifacts of lasting value. In CHI '06, pages 1037--1046, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Environmental Protection Agency. National Directory of Volunteer Monitoring Programs, 2011. http://yosemite.epa.gov/water/volmon.nsf.Google Scholar
- J. Giles. Internet encyclopaedias go head to head. Nature, 438(7070):900--901, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Halfaker, A. Kittur, R. Kraut, and J. Riedl. A jury of your peers: quality, experience and ownership in wikipedia. In WikiSym '09, pages 15:1--15:10, New York, NY, USA, 2009, ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Kim, C. Robson, T. Zimmerman, J. Pierce, and E. M. Haber. Creek watch: pairing usefulness and usability for successful citizen science. In CHI '11, pages 2125--2134, New York, NY, USA, 2011, ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Lakshminarayanan. Using citizens to do science versus citizens as scientists. Ecology and Society, 12, 2007. Response 2. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/resp2/.Google Scholar
- A. Lawrence, 'no personal motive?' volunteers, biodiversity, and the false dichotomies of participation. Ethics, Place and Environment, 9:279--298(20), October 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Luther, S. Counts, K. B. Stecher, A. Hoff, and P. Johns. Pathfinder: an online collaboration environment for citizen scientists. In CHI '09, pages 239--248, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Nerbonne and K. Nelson. Volunteer macroinvertebrate monitoring: Tensions among group goals, data quality, and outcomes. Environmental Management, 42:470--479, 2008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Nicholson, J. Ryan, and D. Hodgkins. Community data - where does the value lie? assessing confidence limits of community collected water quality data. Water Science and Technology, 45:193--200, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Red Lake Watershed District and Red River Basin Monitoring Advisory Committee. Standard Operating Procedures for Water Quality Monitoring in the Red River Watershed, 8th edition, Mar. 2011. http://www.redlakewatershed.org/waterquality/RLWD%20SOP%20Revision%208.pdf.Google Scholar
- D. Ribes and T. A. Finholt. Representing community: knowing users in the face of changing constituencies. In CSCW '08, pages 107--116, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Riehle. How and why wikipedia works: an interview with angela beesley, elisabeth bauer, and kizu naoko. In WikiSym '06, pages 3--8, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Savan, A. J. Morgan, and C. Gore. Volunteer environmental monitoring and the role of the universities: The case of citizens' environment watch. Environmental Management, 31:0561--0568, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. M. Strong, Y. W. Lee, and R. Y. Wang. Data quality in context. Commun. ACM, 40:103--110, May 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Stvilia, M. B. Twidale, L. C. Smith, and L. Gasser. Information Quality Work Organization in Wikipedia. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6):983--1001, 2008. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. L. Sullivan, C. L. Wood, M. J. Iliff, R. E. Bonney, D. Fink, and S. Kelling. ebird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences. Biological Conservation, 142(10):2282--2292, 2009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. Wand and R. Y. Wang. Anchoring data quality dimensions in ontological foundations. Commun. ACM, 39:86--95, November 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Wang, V. Storey, and C. Firth. A framework for analysis of data quality research. Knowledge and Data Engineering, IEEE Transactions on, 7(4):623--640, Aug. 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Y. Wang and D. M. Strong. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J. Manage. Inf. Syst., 12:5--33, March 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia:ignore all rules. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia, 2011. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Quality is a verb: the operationalization of data quality in a citizen science community
Recommendations
Integrating data quality requirements to citizen science application design
MEDES '19: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Management of Digital EcoSystemsData quality is an important aspect in many fields. In citizen science application databases, data quality is often found lacking, which is why there needs to be a method of integrating data quality into the design. This paper tackles the problem by ...
Enhancing the Quality and Trust of Citizen Science Data
ESCIENCE '10: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Sixth International Conference on e-ScienceThe Internet, Web 2.0 and Social Networking technologies are enabling citizens to actively participate in “citizen science” projects by contributing data to scientific programs. However, the limited expertise of contributors can lead to poor quality or ...
Determining the use of data quality metadata (DQM) for decision making purposes and its impact on decision outcomes - An exploratory study
Decision making processes and their outcomes can be affected by a number of factors. Among them, the quality of the data is critical. Poor quality data cause poor decisions. Although this fact is widely known, data quality (DQ) is still a critical issue ...
Comments