Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Aberasturi Rodríguez, A.;
Bandera, I.F.; Navarro-Pedreño, J. Can
Citizens Do Science? Science in
Common and Social Responsibility.
Sci 2024,6, 26. https://doi.org/
10.3390/sci6020026
Academic Editor: Sharifu Ura
Received: 20 February 2024
Revised: 19 April 2024
Accepted: 26 April 2024
Published: 1 May 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Essay
Can Citizens Do Science? Science in Common and
Social Responsibility
Ainara Aberasturi Rodríguez 1, 2, *, Ignacio Fierro Bandera 3and Jose Navarro-Pedreño 2, *
1Museo Paleontológico de Elche, Plaza de San Juan 3, 03203 Elche, Spain
2
Department of Agrochemistry and Environment, University Miguel Hernández of Elche, 03202 Elche, Spain
3GeaLand Patrimonio SL, 3 Tibi St., 03010 Alicante, Spain; fi[email protected]
*Correspondence: [email protected] (A.A.R.); [email protected] (J.N.-P.); Tel.: +34-966658417 (J.N.-P.)
Abstract: Citizen science is an effective tool that unites ordinary citizens and scientists for a common
cause. In particular, this tool enables ordinary citizens to participate in research and increases the
likelihood of generating new knowledge. It is seen as the democratization of science. It is mainly
applied in developed countries, and citizens usually help obtain environmental data with emerging
technologies. However, training citizens to obtain good-quality data is one of the most significant
challenges. It is also important to involve citizens in other phases, such as data analysis, discussion,
and knowledge generation. Citizen science can be a tool for integrating different groups in science to
promote social inclusion, including environmental, agricultural, earth, and life sciences. Thus, citizen
science can contribute to education, sustainability, and climate change mitigation.
Keywords: data acquisition; earth sciences; education; social integration
1. Introduction: Concept of Citizen Science
Scientific research is a time-consuming task that requires, among other things, financial
effort and great dedication on the part of scientists. Research usually focuses on a field of
knowledge in a discipline, addressing a problem, solving it, and providing new knowledge
or new perspectives about the issue investigated. This implies the existence of prior
scientific knowledge and training to undertake research. However, science is more than
research, and the purpose of science is linked dynamically to society [
1
]. It is a tool that can
be used to discover our environment and the way that things happen, and it can help drive
humankind forward. Citizens can contribute to science by providing a large workforce to
solve research problems, promoting participation, and increasing their ability to engage
citizens in democratic debates about scientific and technical issues [2].
Basic research and applied research are the foundations that support the progress of
society and improvements in the quality of life. Nowadays, under the challenges provoked
by climate change, research has been converted into one of the most powerful tools to
mitigate the negative effects and translate innovation to society to combat the problems we
face, building on multiple analytical frameworks, including those from the physical and
social sciences, and identifying opportunities for transformative action that are effective [
3
].
Moreover, educational and informational programs using the arts, participatory modeling,
and citizen science can facilitate awareness, heighten risk perception, and influence behav-
iors [
3
]. Even more, learning from fieldwork experiences creates new understandings of
existing social challenges and new commitments to making change happen [4].
Following the “White Paper on Citizen Science for Europe” [
5
], science should not
leave aside the people it serves in the society for which scientists work. The integration of
people into science is the foundation of citizen science [
5
]. However, the major issues are
how to integrate people and how they can develop valid scientific work.
In citizen science, a broad network of people collaborates [
6
]. Participants provide
experimental data and facilities for researchers, raise new questions, and co-create a new
Sci 2024,6, 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/sci6020026 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sci
Sci 2024,6, 26 2 of 14
scientific culture. In theory, the role of people is more than a passive one because they can
ask questions and provide theories, hypotheses, and discussion. While they add value,
volunteers acquire new learning and skills and gain a deeper understanding of scientific
work in positive ways. However, discussion about the level of participants in research
projects is still undertaken, from lay to expert citizens, but surely this depends on the type
of project, and it is important to determine in what ways an expert might enhance or limit
the citizen science study of a particular environmental issue [
7
]. An expert citizen can be a
double-edged sword, depending on whether researchers are looking for advice or to collect
the feelings and expectations of the non-expert citizen.
The definition of citizen science is not static, as it is an evolving concept; new forms
of participation continually appear along with new and diverse definitions. One of the
definitions given, as commented previously, is that presented in the “White Paper on Citizen
Science for Europe” [
5
]: citizen science refers to general public participation in scientific
research activities in which citizens actively contribute, either with their intellectual effort,
with knowledge of their environment, or by contributing their tools and resources. The
concept seems new, and obviously, the application of this concept is recent under this
given definition. Although the participation of citizens in science is not new, examples can
be found in the past century or even before, associated to the emergence of professional
scientists in the mid 19th century [
8
]. However, the term citizen science was introduced in
the social and natural sciences during the middle of the 1990s [9,10].
Citizen science is considered a part of citizen expertise, although there are some
discrepancies because citizen expertise is a term that entails a conflict of values: the person
participating as a citizen expert is expected to be, at the same time, a citizen and an expert
on a specific concept or issue [
11
]. Krick [
12
] focused her work on three types of citizen
expertise: local knowledge, service user involvement, and citizen science. These are all
located in different societal sectors and research fields and are characterized in terms of
their epistemological and political status. But, considering the last one, the definition given
indicated that citizen science is used to define the collaborative research practices that
involve non-scientists in scholarly knowledge production [
13
]. Citizen science initiatives
and publications proliferate, especially in the life and environmental sciences and in projects
that gather and typify large amounts of observation.
Beyond an exact definition, the main characteristics that describe citizen science,
considering the previous definitions, are as follows: the participation of non-scientists,
the collaboration of non-scientists with scientists, the acquisition of data by non-scientists,
the enrolment of non-scientists in the generation of knowledge, and, finally, scholarly
knowledge production.
The interest in citizen science is obvious, as it includes the field of public participation
in scientific research, and it has drawn the attention of environmental researchers and the
public alike [
7
]. However, an additional characteristic is being added to citizen science,
related to the accessibility of the new technologies. For today’s quality of life to be consid-
ered a prospect for people in the future, participatory democracy must be interwoven with
accessibility [13].
The participation of citizens should be recognized in some way. Can scientists give
recognition to citizens for their work? If yes, how can they do it? This is a difficult
question to answer because citizen science is commonly conducted with volunteers or with
people enrolled in regulated teaching at different levels, from schoolchildren to university
students [
14
,
15
]. Even more, if the number of participants is too high, although it depends
on the project, establishing a method for giving recognition is not easy. However, a good
example is the campaign “Sponsor a Rock”, proposed by the IGME (Geological and Mining
Institute of Spain, Madrid, Spain) [
16
], involving citizens in the selection and monitoring of
the state of geological elements, recognizing citizens as sponsors of places and elements of
geological interest (LIG, in Spanish: Lugares de Interés Geológico) and, to a large extent,
guarantors of their surveillance, status, and the information transmitted to the IGME. This
program facilitates a diploma in recognition of the dedication and commitment to it. People
Sci 2024,6, 26 3 of 14
feel the geological element as something of its own, as a real geological heritage with
inherited value [
17
]. Another way to recognize the work is belonging to a citizen science
observatory, in which people are integrated and feel inside a group of research, feeling
this group as their own place and as real participants of research; for example, platforms
like the citizen observatories (COs), for instance, https://eu-citizen.science (accessed on
28 February 2024), created in EU member states [18].
As a result of this open, networked, and transdisciplinary scenario, science–society–policy
interactions are improved, leading, in turn, to more democratic research based on evidence
and informed decision-making [
5
]. This is, in part, a result of the relationship between
science policy and public opinion, considered to be a lively topic [
19
]. The democratization
of science, being quite a complex concept, basically means opening the doors of science to
society and to the active participation of citizens.
Emerging technologies expand the frontiers of ecological research and public engage-
ment [
20
]. Based on new technologies and the spread of mobile personal communication
devices and other tools to be connected online and in real-time (camera, microphone,
GPS, and data storage devices), citizen observatories have been created in many countries.
Internet access coverage in the territory is another very relevant factor. Moreover, citizen
observatories are community-based environmental monitoring and information systems
that invite individuals to share observations, typically via mobile phone or the web [
21
]. In
this sense, observations are mostly related to the close environment of the observer. These
observatories serve as a platform to spread citizen science and projects that reclaim the
participation of the people.
One of these observatories is located in Spain, the “Observatorio de la Ciencia Ciu-
dadana en España” (Observatory of Citizen Science in Spain) [
22
]. The main objective of
this observatory is to compile citizen science projects carried out in Spain with the aim of
disseminating them and creating a network of collaboration and participation between the
different agents involved: professional scientists, citizen scientists, managers, promoters,
politicians, science disseminators, and communicators. Most of the projects shown in the
observatory are based on the request for data from observations made by citizens in their
environment, although there are other projects that involve more active participation of
citizens, and some of them could be classified as demonstration projects.
After the previous considerations regarding the definition and characteristics of citizen
science, the aim of this paper is to show the variability in the projects in which it is presented,
even when this concept was introduced in the recent literature during the last twenty-five
years. In addition, the countries where citizen science is implemented and the most common
themes are shown through a brief review of scientific publications on the topic, how data
are obtained by citizens, and finally, the use of citizen science is proposed for education
and the integration of different groups, including those who have different abilities or are
close to social marginalization. All of this is analyzed from a critical perspective, in which
the evolution of citizen participation strategies has been changing over time.
2. Citizen Science in the World
Globalization is a phenomenon that is present in all human activities. This is the case
for citizen science, but the number of related projects and the intensity and number of
participants differ between countries [
23
]. The field of citizen science is becoming more
widely represented worldwide, including in well-established regional networks [
24
], such
as the European Citizen Science Association [
25
], the Citizen Science Association in the
USA [
26
], the Australian Citizen Science Association [
27
], and globally via the Citizen
Science Global Partnership [28].
After searching in any database (Scopus was the one selected in this article), an idea
about the development of citizen science and in which countries it is presented has been
elucidated. In this case, seeking the number of publications between 1977 and 2023 re-
lated to citizen science, there were 24,395 documents and 15,606 articles, but only 4539
were used as keywords for citizen science. Most of them were associated with social sci-
Sci 2024,6, 26 4 of 14
ences, environmental sciences, and agricultural and biological sciences as subject areas
(Figure 1). Both are the areas in which the greatest number of publications are made in
relation to citizen participation in science, mainly in life, environmental, and ecological
sciences. This is surely because they are the most related subjects to our surrounding envi-
ronment, to what we perceive immediately, and from where we can obtain a greater number
of observations.
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 15
After searching in any database (Scopus was the one selected in this article), an idea
about the development of citizen science and in which countries it is presented has been
elucidated. In this case, seeking the number of publications between 1977 and 2023 related
to citizen science, there were 24,395 documents and 15,606 articles, but only 4539 were
used as keywords for citizen science. Most of them were associated with social sciences,
environmental sciences, and agricultural and biological sciences as subject areas (Figure
1). Both are the areas in which the greatest number of publications are made in relation to
citizen participation in science, mainly in life, environmental, and ecological sciences. This
is surely because they are the most related subjects to our surrounding environment, to
what we perceive immediately, and from where we can obtain a greater number of obser-
vations.
Figure 1. Number of publications related to citizen science per subject area of Scopus (1977–2023).
The number of publications increased from 1977 to 2023, achieving the highest values
in the last three years (2020–2022) (Figure 2).
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
Social Sciences
Environmental Science
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Computer Science
Medicine
Arts and Humanities
Engineering
Earth and Planetary Sciences
Business, Management and…
Biochemistry, Genetics and…
Mathematics
Multidisciplinary
Economics, Econometrics and Finance
Psychology
Physics and Astronomy
Decision Sciences
Energy
Nursing
Immunology and Microbiology
Chemistry
Neuroscience
Materials Science
Health Professions
Chemical Engineering
Pharmacology, Toxicology and…
Veterinary
Dentistry
Documents
Subject area
Figure 1. Number of publications related to citizen science per subject area of Scopus (1977–2023).
The number of publications increased from 1977 to 2023, achieving the highest values
in the last three years (2020–2022) (Figure 2).
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15
Figure 2. Number of publications per year about citizen science based on the Scopus database (1977–
2023) and the tendency line during this period.
Considering the origin of publications, the countries with a greater number of studies
are situated in North America, Australia, and Europe, as Figure 3 shows. The United States
of America stands out among all countries, followed by the United Kingdom, Germany,
Italy, Australia, Spain, Canada, France, the Netherlands, and Brazil.
Figure 3. Number of publications about citizen science per country, source Scopus database (1977–
2023).
The number of documents published per author confirms the results shown per
country, as Figure 4 shows.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Number of documents
Year
Figure 2. Number of publications per year about citizen science based on the Scopus database
(1977–2023) and the tendency line during this period.
Sci 2024,6, 26 5 of 14
Considering the origin of publications, the countries with a greater number of studies
are situated in North America, Australia, and Europe, as Figure 3shows. The United States
of America stands out among all countries, followed by the United Kingdom, Germany,
Italy, Australia, Spain, Canada, France, the Netherlands, and Brazil.
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 15
Figure 2. Number of publications per year about citizen science based on the Scopus database (1977–
2023) and the tendency line during this period.
Considering the origin of publications, the countries with a greater number of studies
are situated in North America, Australia, and Europe, as Figure 3 shows. The United States
of America stands out among all countries, followed by the United Kingdom, Germany,
Italy, Australia, Spain, Canada, France, the Netherlands, and Brazil.
Figure 3. Number of publications about citizen science per country, source Scopus database (1977–
2023).
The number of documents published per author confirms the results shown per
country, as Figure 4 shows.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
Number of documents
Year
Figure 3. Number of publications about citizen science per country, source Scopus database (1977–2023).
The number of documents published per author confirms the results shown per
country, as Figure 4shows.
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 15
Figure 4. Number of publications per author (first ten authors, source Scopus database from 1977–
2023).
This probably means that the major concern about citizen science is within developed
countries, as confirmed by the presence of relevant organizations, as mentioned in the first
section. It is important to note that most of the projects and initiatives about the participa-
tion of citizens in scientific research are centered on the environmental, agricultural, and
biological sciences. In fact, based on Tweddle et al. [29], the term citizen science is re-
stricted to studies of biodiversity and the environment. However, this has been overcome.
Citizen observatories (COs) are directly engaged in environmental observation, as
the European Commission indicates, talking about COs: “innovative earth observation
technologies (in particular those based on the use of mobile telephony) . . . [and] commu-
nity-based environmental monitoring, data collection, interpretation, and information de-
livery systems; empower communities with the capability to monitor and report on their
environment; and enable communities to access the information they need to make deci-
sions in an understandable and readily usable form” [21]. Technological facilities are be-
coming the most important tool for citizen science and are responsible for increasing the
participation of citizens (both laymen and experts). The use of new technologies is wide-
spread in developed countries, as is the number of research facilities, and it is precisely
this dissemination of technology that arouses the interest of researchers, promoting the
greatest number of projects associated with citizen science. Access to technology seems to
be one of the factors influencing citizen participation and its facilitation.
The citizens of developed countries, most of them accustomed to participation in po-
litical decisions, could be more motivated to participate in research projects than others.
However, motivations for participating in citizen science projects vary between individu-
als. In order to aract participants and keep them engaged in a project, it is important to
understand what drives them to participate and why they stick with a project or leave it
[30].
In general, there are two factors that motivate participation. One of them is altruism,
and the second one is principlism, which is the framework of four universal and basic
ethical principles: respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice [31].
However, the order of both depends on the type of project and the individual [32].
The conditions, based on the studies mentioned previously, needed to develop citi-
zen science can be summarized as follows: the number of researchers and projects, the
awareness of scientists to facilitate the participation of citizens, the existence of people
motivated to get involved in science, and the facilities provided by technology. It should
55
49
38
37
36
36
34
32
31
31
0 102030405060
Callaghan, C.T.
Fink, D.
Lintott, C.
Wiggins, A.
Crowston, K.
Haklay, M.
See, L.
King, A.C.
Hochachka, W.M.
Kelling, S.
Number of documents published
Authors
Figure 4. Number of publications per author (first ten authors, source Scopus database from 1977–2023).
This probably means that the major concern about citizen science is within developed
countries, as confirmed by the presence of relevant organizations, as mentioned in the
first section. It is important to note that most of the projects and initiatives about the
participation of citizens in scientific research are centered on the environmental, agricultural,
and biological sciences. In fact, based on Tweddle et al. [
29
], the term citizen science is
restricted to studies of biodiversity and the environment. However, this has been overcome.
Citizen observatories (COs) are directly engaged in environmental observation, as the
European Commission indicates, talking about COs: “innovative earth observation tech-
Sci 2024,6, 26 6 of 14
nologies (in particular those based on the use of mobile telephony) . . . [and] community-
based environmental monitoring, data collection, interpretation, and information delivery
systems; empower communities with the capability to monitor and report on their environ-
ment; and enable communities to access the information they need to make decisions in an
understandable and readily usable form” [
21
]. Technological facilities are becoming the
most important tool for citizen science and are responsible for increasing the participation
of citizens (both laymen and experts). The use of new technologies is widespread in devel-
oped countries, as is the number of research facilities, and it is precisely this dissemination
of technology that arouses the interest of researchers, promoting the greatest number of
projects associated with citizen science. Access to technology seems to be one of the factors
influencing citizen participation and its facilitation.
The citizens of developed countries, most of them accustomed to participation in
political decisions, could be more motivated to participate in research projects than others.
However, motivations for participating in citizen science projects vary between individ-
uals. In order to attract participants and keep them engaged in a project, it is impor-
tant to understand what drives them to participate and why they stick with a project or
leave it [30].
In general, there are two factors that motivate participation. One of them is altruism,
and the second one is principlism, which is the framework of four universal and basic
ethical principles: respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and justice [
31
].
However, the order of both depends on the type of project and the individual [32].
The conditions, based on the studies mentioned previously, needed to develop citi-
zen science can be summarized as follows: the number of researchers and projects, the
awareness of scientists to facilitate the participation of citizens, the existence of people
motivated to get involved in science, and the facilities provided by technology. It should
be considered that the projects have to be well designed, and regular feedback to citizens
motivates them and helps them avoid leaving.
3. Citizen Science: People and Projects
Scientific and technological issues present particular challenges and opportunities
for participation: on the one hand, they are associated with claims to highly specialized,
professionalized knowledge and expertise that may serve to exclude, yet on the other
hand, recent scientific controversies have also created new demands and opportunities for
concerted citizen engagement in decision-making [
23
]. Projects involving citizens provide
a new dimension concerning scientific issues and policymakers.
Citizen science has no barriers regarding the age of participants in these projects. This
is one of the characteristics that makes this methodology attractive to most people. There
are hundreds of project examples in the literature where people of any age participate
with scientists to produce new knowledge or even preserve knowledge to avoid loss. The
last one is the case in several social projects that maintain the memory of society, such
as the Puçol School Museum (Elche, Spain), where a school project started in the 1960s
has managed to preserve, value, study, and value the life, materials, and customs of their
ancestors [33]. This project has been recognized by UNESCO.
As an example of citizen science projects in the USA, National Geography [
34
] pub-
lished a list of them for grades 3–12+ belonging to the most popular subjects (Biology,
Ecology, and Earth Science): Bird Census, Celebrate Urban Birds, Monitor Bird Nests, The
Horseshoe Count, Butterfly Census, Search Space, World Monitoring Day, Frog and Toad
Populations, Count Birds, Observe Appalachian Flowers, Survey Monarch Populations,
Learn About Local Plants, Observe Plant Life Cycles, Take Mountain-Top Photographs,
Collect Weather Data, Classify Galaxies, Bird Feeder Stakeout, Bird Watch, Participate in a
Field Survey, Observe Coral Bleaching, Measure Night-Sky Brightness, Chesapeake Bay
Foundation, Observe Wildlife Anywhere, Document How Landscapes Change, Exoplanet
Watch. Most of them have observations of the environment in common.
Sci 2024,6, 26 7 of 14
Those tasks need perseverance to obtain good results. For this reason, it is necessary
to maintain the interest of participants and incorporate new observers. Altruism and
principlism are not the only things that attract citizens. People take part in citizen science
for many reasons. West et al. [
35
] indicated that “citizen science does not just help scientists;
it can also be an opportunity to learn, to get exercise, and to meet new people. As project
designers, we really should try to be as inclusive as possible.” Scientists should motivate
people and engage them in science.
Following the example given in a previous section, “Sponsor a Rock” [
16
], it is impor-
tant to keep the project alive because, in Earth Science, it is necessary to follow and know
what is happening because human actions quickly affect the land surface and the crust of
the Earth is changing naturally. In this sense, the project aims to keep people engaged in
the long term. The last email campaign to the participants is presented in Figure 5. This
message is a good reminder and motivation for participants to remain vigilant and continue
with the project.
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 15
Figure 5. Message sent to citizen participants in the project “Save a Rock” (IGME) [13].
Although there are a lot of projects, the participation of people in scientific observa-
tions is more than three centuries old. Highfield [36] pointed out that “Even though the
term ‘citizen science only entered the Oxford English Dictionary in the last year (2014)”,
there is evidence from several centuries ago, found when, in 1715, Edmund Halley used
Philosophical Transactions to ask colleagues to help him observe a total solar eclipse,
prompting observers from all over the country to respond to Halley (1715) [37]. More ref-
erences can be found in the post by Highfield [36], in which the participation of citizens
and experts was mostly utilized to collect observations. It is worthy to mention initiatives
like this of a teacher named Wells Woodbridge Cooke, who, while living in the Mississippi
Valley, began noting the arrival dates of migratory birds in 1880 [38]. Following bird-
watching initiatives, it is remarkable to consider the citizen science project Audubons
Christmas Bird Count. Every year since 1900, Audubon has asked citizens to observe and
collect information about local birds between December 14 and January 5 [39].
Trying to summarize a citizen science project implies observations, data analysis, dis-
cussion, and the generation of knowledge. This is a basic approach that can be useful in
understanding the common role of researchers and citizens in the same project. This is
close to that mentioned by Spasiano et al. [40], who talked about the most common defi-
nitions distinguishing three typologies (or levels) of citizen science: (1) contributory, (2)
collaborated, and (3) co-created, close to observations and data, data analysis, and the
generation of knowledge, respectively. Figure 6 is a schematic representation of the par-
ticipation of both, based on our own observations in our own and nearby projects, where
peoples support for observations is close to 100%, and this drastically reduces when con-
sidering data analysis and the generation of new knowledge.
Figure 5. Message sent to citizen participants in the project “Save a Rock” (IGME) [13].
Although there are a lot of projects, the participation of people in scientific observations
is more than three centuries old. Highfield [
36
] pointed out that “Even though the term
‘citizen science’ only entered the Oxford English Dictionary in the last year (2014)”, there
is evidence from several centuries ago, found when, in 1715, Edmund Halley used Philo-
sophical Transactions to ask colleagues to help him observe a total solar eclipse, prompting
observers from all over the country to respond to Halley (1715) [
37
]. More references can
be found in the post by Highfield [
36
], in which the participation of citizens and experts
was mostly utilized to collect observations. It is worthy to mention initiatives like this of a
teacher named Wells Woodbridge Cooke, who, while living in the Mississippi Valley, began
noting the arrival dates of migratory birds in 1880 [
38
]. Following birdwatching initiatives,
it is remarkable to consider the citizen science project Audubon’s Christmas Bird Count.
Every year since 1900, Audubon has asked citizens to observe and collect information about
local birds between December 14 and January 5 [39].
Trying to summarize a citizen science project implies observations, data analysis,
discussion, and the generation of knowledge. This is a basic approach that can be useful
in understanding the common role of researchers and citizens in the same project. This
is close to that mentioned by Spasiano et al. [
40
], who talked about the most common
definitions distinguishing three typologies (or levels) of citizen science: (1) contributory,
(2) collaborated, and (3) co-created, close to observations and data, data analysis, and
the generation of knowledge, respectively. Figure 6is a schematic representation of the
participation of both, based on our own observations in our own and nearby projects,
where people’s support for observations is close to 100%, and this drastically reduces when
considering data analysis and the generation of new knowledge.
Sci 2024,6, 26 8 of 14
Sci 2024, 6, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 15
Figure 6. Estimation in percentage of participation in the three main phases of a citizen science pro-
ject (based on our own observations).
Considering that data come from citizens, we should consider their reliability be-
cause the most important things in all research are the data, their validity, and the trust
generated by their use.
4. Reliability of the Data Coming from Citizens
The feature that most distinguishes citizen science from other forms of science is the
involvement of non-professional scientists in the scientific process. These non-scientists,
the “citizens” in citizen science, can collaborate with scientists in all stages and aspects of
the scientific process, but in most projects, they only contribute to data collection and anal-
ysis [30].
Are citizens ready to obtain good scientific data? Although data can be complex, sim-
ple, direct, or prepared and derived from previous studies, citizens have the ability to
observe their environment and make these observations in such a way that a scientist can
use them to understand what is happening and properly analyze the data. As Van Eupen
et al. [41] showed for species distribution models, data are expected to be cleansed, in-
cluding the removal of spatial and temporal outliers, duplicates, and records with low
precision. Data, in general, should be filtered based on record aributes that hold infor-
mation on the observation process or post-entry data validation [42]. As an example, the
eBird platform, one of the largest citizen science projects in the world, launched by the
Cornell Lab of Ornithology in 2002, using the message long employed by the labs citizen
science staff: “Help scientists track the birds” [43], has data curation processes carried out
by humans and machines [44].
Irwin [8] emphasizes that lay people possess valuable insights and can produce reli-
able knowledge, which is opposite to the view of Bonney (1996) [9], where the expertise
of citizens is necessary, aributing a more limited role to citizens. This is the dilemma that
exists when it comes to participating in these projects: the participation of laymen or ex-
perts or of everyone together. Common conceptualizations of participation assume that
high-level participation is good and low-level participation is bad. However, examining
participation in terms of high and low levels of knowledge and engagement reveals dif-
ferent types of value in each case [14]. The solution lies in the type of data and the methods
that should be used to acquire them and, even more so, in the prior training that partici-
pants in the project can receive. It is the researchers responsibility to ensure that citizens
have help and support to be able to correctly carry out their observations. The research
Figure 6. Estimation in percentage of participation in the three main phases of a citizen science project
(based on our own observations).
Considering that data come from citizens, we should consider their reliability because
the most important things in all research are the data, their validity, and the trust generated
by their use.
4. Reliability of the Data Coming from Citizens
The feature that most distinguishes citizen science from other forms of science is the
involvement of non-professional scientists in the scientific process. These non-scientists,
the “citizens” in citizen science, can collaborate with scientists in all stages and aspects
of the scientific process, but in most projects, they only contribute to data collection and
analysis [30].
Are citizens ready to obtain good scientific data? Although data can be complex,
simple, direct, or prepared and derived from previous studies, citizens have the ability
to observe their environment and make these observations in such a way that a scientist
can use them to understand what is happening and properly analyze the data. As Van
Eupen et al. [
41
] showed for species distribution models, data are expected to be cleansed,
including the removal of spatial and temporal outliers, duplicates, and records with low
precision. Data, in general, should be filtered based on record attributes that hold infor-
mation on the observation process or post-entry data validation [
42
]. As an example, the
eBird platform, one of the largest citizen science projects in the world, launched by the
Cornell Lab of Ornithology in 2002, using the message long employed by the lab’s citizen
science staff: “Help scientists track the birds” [
43
], has data curation processes carried out
by humans and machines [44].
Irwin [
8
] emphasizes that lay people possess valuable insights and can produce reliable
knowledge, which is opposite to the view of Bonney (1996) [
9
], where the expertise of
citizens is necessary, attributing a more limited role to citizens. This is the dilemma that
exists when it comes to participating in these projects: the participation of laymen or
experts or of everyone together. Common conceptualizations of participation assume that
high-level participation is good and low-level participation is bad. However, examining
participation in terms of high and low levels of knowledge and engagement reveals different
types of value in each case [
14
]. The solution lies in the type of data and the methods that
should be used to acquire them and, even more so, in the prior training that participants
in the project can receive. It is the researcher’s responsibility to ensure that citizens have
help and support to be able to correctly carry out their observations. The research design
Sci 2024,6, 26 9 of 14
should be used to minimize the mistakes that can occur during the acquisition of data.
It is interesting to mention that in the citizen science games area, several projects train
their citizens before they can contribute to the project. For example, Stall Catchers from
Cornell University (https://stallcatchers.com/main, accessed on 28 February 2024) or
MalariaSpot was developed by the Polytechnic University of Madrid as a mobile app.
Foldit is a successful example [
45
]. This game is a one-of-a-kind protein folding computer
game developed by several university scientists: the Center for Game Science (University of
Washington, Seattle, WA, USA), the Institute for Protein Design (University of Washington),
the Cooper Lab (Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA), the Khatib Lab (University of
Massachusetts Dartmouth, Dartmouth, MA, USA), the Siegel Lab (University of California,
Davis, CA, USA), the Meiler Lab (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA), and the
Horowitz Lab (University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA), where citizens can contribute to
advanced research on human health, cutting-edge bioengineering, and the inner workings
of biology.
However, errors can always occur in observations and in data collection, which can
harm the project as a whole or partially. A review of the data is necessary. But what happens
when there are lots of data? How can we separate the errors? In these cases, we can resort
to computational statistics and artificial intelligence (AI). Notwithstanding, it is important
to ensure the veracity of the data that will later be used in the analysis. AI supports
the collection of big data and favors the opportunities and challenges of using citizen
science and AI techniques for ecological monitoring under six key categories: efficiency
(opportunities only), accuracy, discovery, engagement, resources, and ethics (challenges
only) [
46
]. AI is frequently used in environmental citizen science, and it is of great concern
to develop AI solutions for reducing errors and biases in volunteers’ contributions to
support the validity of citizen science outcomes and data quality validation. Overall, the
integration of citizen science and AI technology can be used to help maximize the amount
of data that can be collected and processed efficiently through the use of machine learning
trend models in the eBird project [
47
] while simultaneously engaging and informing people
about professional research activities and their value for society and decision-making
processes that affect socio-economic and environmental systems [48].
Although, as reported in many works, the participation of citizens is limited to data
acquisition, there are some responsible tasks they can participate in, such as co-designing
research and contributing to the interpretation of data, and the impetus of this tradition
is empowering, bottom–up, and cooperative [
49
]. Opening the participation to a more
specialized task requires a more complex research design but paves the way to open up
science and science policy to the public, raise the responsiveness of science to society’s
needs, and approximate ‘scientific citizenship’ [8].
5. Citizen Science as an Educational Tool
Education is immersed in continuous processes of transformation and innovation.
For instance, augmented reality and computer sciences are becoming important tools in
education and can be useful to increase the participation and involvement of people in
science, improving the educational process and future research [
50
,
51
]. Although these
tools are not specific to citizen science, they can positively contribute. Surely, without the
development of computer science, it would have been very difficult to engage citizens
and encourage their participation as well as the improvement of education. In both cases,
technology has played a fundamental role, in particular computer science.
The participation of the scientific community is necessary to develop citizen science
projects [
29
]. Moreover, it is the best way to integrate citizens, especially the youngest, into
the importance of science in its democratization and to promote the capacity for criticism
and decision-making. The practice, therefore, provides significant opportunities for youth
science education, particularly in the realm of inquiry, in both formal and informal learning
environments [
52
]. Citizen science is used as a tool to teach ‘scientific understanding’ and
skills to the public. Citizen science projects in the natural science tradition are usually top-
Sci 2024,6, 26 10 of 14
down projects initiated by professional researchers [
53
]. However, those related to climate
change impacts and sustainability are becoming more important, and the participation of
people can contribute directly to the implementation of sustainable development goals [
54
].
Although some of the projects are centered on school and university groups, volunteers
are one of the main supporters. However, citizen science is not well known because this
tool acts as a catalyst that changes the perspective and knowledge of the environment of
marginal groups in society. Social inclusion is one of the targets that can be achieved by
using citizen science [55].
Citizen science can be used as a tool for the integration of different groups, both
marginal from a social point of view and those who have different sensory, physical, or
cognitive abilities. Moreover, it will be a perfect space for interaction between different
groups and people pursuing common goals. The potentiality of citizen science can be
exploited in this sense, but the responsibility of researchers will be increased because the
design of the research, the activities, data acquisition, observations, and the later phases of
the whole project should be well designed considering the target of integration.
Here are some examples developed in Spain. One of the most interesting examples
found in the literature is The Inclusive Circular Lab of the “Fundación Juan XXIII” [
56
].
This is an educational program based on circular economy and citizen science through
research projects and composting of organic waste in schools, led by people with intellectual
disabilities. The leadership and capabilities of people with intellectual disabilities have
been revealed, creating environments of integration and learning experiences. Similar
experiences and examples can be found in other countries, exploring the capacity to engage
people with learning disabilities [
57
,
58
]. Moreover, Carr [
57
] gives important tips about
the design of research for citizen science and people with disabilities (‘Nothing about us
without us’: Inclusive Research Design). Carr [
57
] pointed out that research within learning
disability studies shows that when people with learning disabilities are given help and an
opportunity to be involved in the process, they demonstrate their capabilities. Moreover,
this tool can be an inclusive approach to capacity building within citizen science.
Earth sciences are one of the most important subjects in which citizens can partici-
pate [
59
]. Following this line, in the Paleontological Museum of Elche (MUPE, Elche, Spain),
the project promoted by the National Organization of the Blind of Spain (ONCE, Spain)
called “The hands that see” facilitates the recognition of fossils by touching, and this is a
first step in training people so that they will be able to identify them. This is an experience
that brings blind people closer to the world of paleontology [
60
]. Moreover, through a vol-
unteer project (VOLCAM, Spain), environmental monitoring of outcrops and prospecting
for new geological deposits were carried out with a team of volunteers (citizens) [
61
]. Since
then, there have been numerous projects that the MUPE is developing in this sense and,
importantly, adapting them to society, increasing accessibility and inclusion.
6. Citizen Science vs. Community Science
Citizen science should consider ethical considerations when conceptualizing projects
by embracing (1) inclusivity (finding ways to include those who have traditionally been
excluded), (2) adaptation (modifying projects to provide greater opportunities for varied
participation), (3) sensitivity (ensuring projects take into account and respect cultural
traditions and beliefs), (4) safety (protocols that protect the physical, psychological, and
cultural safety of citizen scientists and society at large), and (5) reciprocity (benefits for
citizen scientists) [62].
The concept and participation of citizens in science have changed, especially in the
past two decades. That is why the term “citizen science” has been complemented or
superseded by others as “neighborhood science” or “community science” to describe
citizen science activities [
63
]. In fact, as Cooper et al. indicated, for citizen science to live up
to its democratizing potential, important issues such as equality and cultures of inclusivity
need to be considered [64].
Sci 2024,6, 26 11 of 14
The changes have been positive; they open new perspectives and, moreover, new
opportunities for all kinds of people. However, gender imbalance is presented in citizen
science, as Ibrahim et al. indicated [
65
], and the fewer projects/publications from poorly
developed countries are barriers that must be overcome.
As a result of these opportunities associated with citizen science and the participation
of people in science, in the European framework, a lot of projects have been developing, and
even the EU Commission has great concern about the possibilities of citizen science and its
essential role in enriching research and reinforcing societies’ trust in science and innovation
in the battle against climate change. Opening up science to society is essential to enriching
research and reinforcing societies’ trust in science and innovation in the battle against
climate change [
66
]. Under Science with and for Society (SwafS), part of Horizon 2020, the
European Commission seeks to promote citizen science projects in research methodolo-
gies by changing a predominantly scientist-led process to a more participatory, inclusive,
and citizen-involved one [
64
]. Citizen science is becoming an important part of the EU
Green Deal and a way to achieve sustainability, making people understand the need for
lifestyle changes.
This task is a work of shared social responsibility, in which citizens and their contribu-
tions, as well as their data, are fundamental to generating new knowledge.
7. Conclusions
Citizen science is one of the most important tools with which to join citizens and
scientists on a common task. It is a collaborative project designed and supervised by
researchers. This is a democratic and participative task. However, most of the time, the
role of citizens is limited to support for observations and data. This role is, in some way,
a passive one. It is important to improve the participation of citizens in all phases of a
research project, favoring the generation of ideas and discussion and enriching the research.
Projects related to citizen science are not only demonstration projects or show projects
because the goals, although not comprehensive, should be the generation of knowledge.
The role of citizens must be less passive and even participate in the following phases of
data analysis and the discussion of the new knowledge generated, although this requires
greater attention and involvement from scientists.
Most citizen science is carried out in developed countries with research traditions
mainly centered on environmental, agricultural, and life sciences. Along with this fact, the
use of new technologies, internet coverage, and ease of access to mobile devices favor the
implementation of citizen science observatories.
The major concern, from a research point of view, is to obtain good data with high
quality and reliability taken by citizens. However, this can be achieved with an adequate
research design and the use of advanced tools, such as AI, to discern which data are
appropriate and which contain errors and biases.
Citizen science is a powerful tool for improving education, whether it is regulated
or not. There has been an increase in the possibilities of generating new knowledge from
citizens. Moreover, it can be a tool for integrating different collectives in science, favoring
social inclusion.
Finally, it is important to note that the strategies adopted by scientists to integrate
citizens, as well as the dissemination of the results and science in society, are key factors for
improving future actions and involving citizens in decision-making and better-achieving
goals and quality of life. Furthermore, citizen science can be a basic tool to understand and
mitigate climate change, promote sustainability, and be part of social responsibility.
Sci 2024,6, 26 12 of 14
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.A.R. and J.N.-P.; methodology, A.A.R. and J.N.-P.;
resources, A.A.R., I.F.B. and J.N.-P.; data curation, A.A.R. and I.F.B.; writing—original draft prepa-
ration, A.A.R. and J.N.-P.; writing—review and editing, A.A.R. and J.N.-P.; supervision, I.F.B. and
J.N.-P.; project administration, A.A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1.
Chugh, M. Science is More Than the Sum of Research. Available online: https://thenode.biologists.com/science-is-more-than-
the-sum-of-research/discussion/ (accessed on 18 October 2023).
2.
Strasser, B.J.; Haklay, M. Citizen Science: Expertise, Demokratie und öffentliche Partizipation; Politische Analyse 1/2018; Schweiz-
erischer Wissenschaftsrat SWR: Bern, Switzerland, 2018; p. 96.
3.
IPCC. Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report; Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Team, H.L., Romero, J., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023; p. 184. [CrossRef]
4.
Mintchev, N.; Daher, M.; Jallad, M.; Pietrostefani, E.; Moore, H.L.; Ghamrawi, G.; Al Harrache, A.; Majed, A.; Younes, Y. Sustained
Citizen Science from research to solutions: A new impact model for Social Sciences. Int. J. Qual. Met. 2022,21, 16094069221133232.
[CrossRef]
5.
Serrano Sanz, F.; Holocher-Ertl, T.; Kieslinger, B.; Sanz García, F.; Silva, C.G. White Paper on Citizen Science for Europe; European
Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2014; pp. 1–35.
6.
Masselot, C.; Jeyaram, R.; Raphaël, T.; Fernández-Marquez, J.L.; Grey, F.; Santolini, M. Collaboration and performance of Citizen
Science projects addressing the sustainable development goals. Citiz. Sci. Theory Pract. 2023,8, 565. [CrossRef]
7. Jordan, R.; Sorensen, A.; Gray, S. Citizen Science, Experts, and Expertise. Curr. World. Environ. 2021,16, 378–383. [CrossRef]
8. Kasperowski, D.; Kullenberg, C. The many modes of citizen science. Sci. Technol. 2019,32, 2–7. [CrossRef]
9. Irwin, A. Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development; Routledge: London, UK, 1995; p. 212.
10. Bonney, R. Citizen science: A lab tradition. Living Bird 1996,15, 7–15.
11.
Meriluoto, T.; Kuokkanen, K. How to make sense of citizen expertise in participatory projects? Curr. Sociol. 2022,70, 974–993.
[CrossRef]
12.
Krick, E. Citizen experts in participatory governance: Democratic and epistemic assets of service user involvement, local
knowledge and citizen science. Curr. Sociol. 2022,70, 994–1012. [CrossRef]
13. Mueller, M.; Tippins, D.; Bryan, L. The future of Citizen science. Democr. Ed. 2011,20, 1–12.
14.
Makuch, K.E.; Aczel, M.R.; Haklay, M. Children and Citizen Science. Participatory citizen science. In Citizen Science: Innovation in
Open Science, Society and Policy; Hecker, S., Haklay, M., Bowser, A., Makuch, Z., Vogel, J., Bonn, A., Eds.; UCL Press: London, UK,
2018; pp. 391–409. [CrossRef]
15.
Wyler, D.; Haklay, M. Integrating citizen science into university. In Citizen Science: Innovation in Open Science, Society and Policy;
Hecker, S., Haklay, M., Bowser, A., Makuch, Z., Vogel, J., Bonn, A., Eds.; UCL Press: London, UK, 2018; pp. 168–181. [CrossRef]
16. IGME. Sponsor a Rock. Available online: https://www.igme.es/patrimonio/apadrinaunaroca.htm (accessed on 18 October 2023).
17.
Sánchez-Ferris, E.; Fierro-Bandera, I.; Aberasturi-Rodríguez, A.; Navarro-Pedreño, J.; Montoya Belló, P. La valoración del
patrimonio geológico y paleontológico como herramienta de gestión: El modelo FOPALI. Span. J. Paleontol. 2019,34, 35–56.
[CrossRef]
18. Eu-Citizen.Science. Available online: https://eu-citizen.science/resource/192 (accessed on 20 October 2023).
19.
Irwin, A. Constructing the scientific citizen: Science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Underst. Sci. 2001,10, 1–18.
[CrossRef]
20.
Newman, G.; Wiggins, A.; Crall, A.; Graham, E.; Newman, S.; Crowston, K. The future of citizen science: Emerging technologies
and shifting paradigms. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2012,10, 298–304. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. WeObserve. Available online: https://www.weobserve.eu/about/citizen-observatories/ (accessed on 18 October 2023).
22. Observatory of Citizen Science in Spain. Available online: https://ciencia-ciudadana.es/ (accessed on 18 October 2023).
23.
Leach, M.; Scoones, I.; Wynne, B. Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement; Zed Books: London, UK, 2005;
pp. 1–295.
24.
Fraisl, D.; Hager, G.; Bedessem, B.; Gold, M.; Hsing, P.Y.; Danielsen, F.; Hitchcock, C.B.; Hulbert, J.M.; Piera, J.; Spiers, H.; et al.
Citizen science in environmental and ecological sciences. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2022,2, 64. [CrossRef]
25. European Citizen Science Association. Available online: https://www.ecsa.ngo/ (accessed on 20 October 2023).
26. Citizen Science Association. Available online: https://citizenscience.org/ (accessed on 20 October 2023).
27. Australian Citizen Science Association. Available online: https://citizenscience.org.au/ (accessed on 20 October 2023).
28. Citizen Global Science Partnership. Available online: https://globalcitizenscience.org/ (accessed on 20 October 2023).
29.
Tweddle, J.C.; Robinson, L.D.; Pocock, M.J.O.; Roy, H.E. Guide to Citizen Science: Developing, Implementing and Evaluating
citizen Science to Study Biodiversity and the Environment in the UK. Natural History Museum and NERC Centre for Ecology &
Hydrology for UK-EOF. 2012. Available online: www.ukeof.org.uk (accessed on 26 October 2023).
Sci 2024,6, 26 13 of 14
30.
Land-Zandstra, A.; Agnello, G.; Gültekin, Y.S. Participants in Citizen Science. In The Science of Citizen Science; Vohland, K.,
Land-Zandstra, A., Ceccaroni, L., Lemmens, R., Perelló, J., Ponti, M., Samson, R., Wagenknecht, K., Eds.; Springer International
Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 243–259. [CrossRef]
31.
Beauchamp, T.L.; Rauprich, O. Principlism. In Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics; Have, H., Ed.; Springer International Publishing:
Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 2282–2293. [CrossRef]
32.
Etter, S.; Strobl, B.; Seibert, J.; van Meerveld, H.J.; Niebert, K.; Stepenuck, F.F. Why do people participate in app-based environment-
focused citizen science projects? Front. Environ. Sci. 2023,11, 1105682. [CrossRef]
33. Puçol School Museum. Available online: https://www.museopusol.com/en/inicio/ (accessed on 26 October 2023).
34.
National Geography. Available online: https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/citizen-science-projects/ (accessed
on 26 October 2023).
35.
West, S.; Dyke, A.; Pateman, R. Why Do People Take Part in Citizen Science? SEI York. Available online: https://www.sei.org/
features/why-do-people-take-part-in-citizen-science/ (accessed on 26 October 2023).
36.
Highfield, R. Three Centuries of Citizen Science. Science Museum of London. Available online: https://blog.sciencemuseum.org.
uk/three-centuries-of-citizen-science/ (accessed on 26 October 2023).
37.
Halley, E. Observations of the Late Total Eclipse of the Sun on the 22d of April Last Past, Made before the Royal Society at Their
House in Crane-Court in Fleet-Street, London. by Dr. Edmund Halley, Reg. Soc. Secr. with an Account of What Has Been
Communicated from Abroad concerning the Same. Phil. Trans. 1715,29, 245–262.
38.
North American Bird Phenology Program. Case Study Overview. Available online: https://www.citizenscience.gov/north-
american-bird-phenology-program/# (accessed on 22 November 2023).
39.
Rudy, L.J. What Is Citizen Science? History, Practices, and Impact. 28 June 2021. Available online: https://www.treehugger.com/
what-is-citizen-science-history-practices-and-impact-5189634 (accessed on 22 November 2023).
40.
Spasiano, A.; Grimaldi, S.; Braccini, A.M.; Nardi, F. Towards a Transdisciplinary Theoretical Framework of Citizen Science:
Results from a Meta-Review Analysis. Sustainability 2021,13, 7904. [CrossRef]
41.
Van Eupen, C.; Maes, D.; Herremans, M.; Swinnen, K.R.R.; Somers, B.; Luca, S. Species profiles support recommendations for
quality filtering of opportunistic citizen science data. Ecol. Mod. 2022,467, 109910. [CrossRef]
42.
Steen, V.A.; Elphick, C.S.; Tingley, M.W. An evaluation of stringent filtering to improve species distribution models from citizen
science data. Biodivers. Res. 2019,25, 1857–1869. [CrossRef]
43. Bonney, R. Expanding the impact of Citizen Science. BioScience 2021,71, 448–451. [CrossRef]
44.
Sullivan, B.J.; Wood, C.L.; Iliff, M.J.; Bonney, R.E.; Fink, D.; Kelling, S. eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the
biological sciences. Biol. Conserv. 2009,142, 2282–2292. [CrossRef]
45.
Waldispühl, J.; Szantner, A.; Knight, R.; Caisse, S.; Pitchford, R. Leveling up citizen science. Nat. Biotech. 2020,38, 1123–1126.
Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-020-0694-x (accessed on 28 February 2024). [CrossRef]
46.
McClure, E.C.; Sievers, M.; Brown, C.J.; Buelow, C.A.; Ditria, E.M.; Hayes, M.A.; Pearson, R.M.; Tulloch, V.J.D.; Unsworth, R.K.F.;
Connolly, R.M. Artificial Intelligence Meets Citizen Science to Supercharge Ecological Monitoring. Patterns 2020,1, 100109.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
47.
Fink, D.; Johnston, A.; Strimas-Mackey, M.; Auer, T.; Hochachka, W.M.; Ligoki, S.; Jaromczyk, L.O.; Robinson, O.; Wood, C.; Kellin,
S.; et al. A double machine learning trend model for Citizen Sceince data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 2023,14, 2435–2448. [CrossRef]
48.
Green, S.E.; Rees, J.P.; Stephens, P.A.; Hill, R.A.; Giordano, A.J. Innovations in camera trapping technology and approaches: The
integration of Citizen science and artificial intelligence. Animals 2020,10, 132. [CrossRef]
49.
Riesch, H.; Potter, C. Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Pub. Und. Sci.
2013,23, 107–120. [CrossRef]
50.
Akçayir, M.; Akçayir, G. Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the
literature. Ed. Res. Rew. 2017,20, 1–11. [CrossRef]
51.
Passey, D. Computer science (CS) in the compulsory education curriculum: Implications for future research. Educ. Inf. Technol.
2017,22, 421–443. [CrossRef]
52.
Bonney, R.; Phillips, T.B.; Enck, J.; Shirk, J.; Trautmann, N. Citizen Science and Youth Education; National Research Council
Committee on Outof-School Time STEM; National Research Council: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; pp. 1–22.
53.
Kasperowski, D.; Hillman, T. The epistemic culture in an online citizen science project: Programs, antiprograms and epistemic
subjects. Soc. Studies Sci. 2018,48, 564–588. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54.
Iwana, A.Y.; Eyzaguirre, I.; Somekawa, S.; Damasceno Pereira, R.S.; Oliveira, R.; Oliveira, I.C.L. Ciência Cidadàe objetivos
do desenvolvimento sustentável (ODS): Desafios e oportunidades para sustentabilidade. In Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente a
importancia dos Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável; Dias da Cruz, D., Cavalcanti de Miranda, G.E., Queiroga Reis, A.L., Eds.;
Editora UFPB: Paraíba, Brasil, 2023; pp. 64–84.
55.
Wagenknecht, K.; Woods, T.; García Sanz, F.; Gold, M.; Bowser, A.; Rüfenacht, S.; Ceccaroni, L.; Piera, L. EU-Citizen.Science: A
Platform for Mainstreaming Citizen Science and Open Science in Europe. Data Intell. 2021,3, 136–149. [CrossRef]
56.
The Inclusive Circular Lab, Fundación Juan XXIII. Available online: https://ciencia-ciudadana.es/proyecto-cc/the-inclusive-
circular-lab-economia- circular-y-ciencia-ciudadana-en-escuelase/ (accessed on 24 October 2023).
57.
Carr, J.E. Can an Inclusive Approach Meaningfully Engage People with Learning Disabilities? Exploring Capacity Building for
Citizen Science. Ph.D. Thesis, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK, 2021. [CrossRef]
Sci 2024,6, 26 14 of 14
58. Sanford, Z. We Can All Be Scientits: Empowering Individuals with Disabilities to Become Citizen Scientists. Charlotte Teachers
Institute. Available online: https://charlotteteachers.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/CTI-2020-Final-UnitZ_Sanford.pdf
(accessed on 28 February 2024).
59.
Haklay, M.; Mazumdar, S.; Warslaw, J. Citizen Science for Observing and Understanding the Earth. In Earth Observation Open
Science and Innovation; Mathieu, P.-P., Aubrecht, C., Eds.; Report Series 15; ISSI Scientific: Bern, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 69–88.
[CrossRef]
60. MUPE. Available online: http://www.cidarismpe.org/ (accessed on 26 October 2023).
61.
Ribera Francés, J. VOLCAM: Diez años de apuesta de Caja mediterráneo por el Tercer Sector del voluntariado ambiental. Panor.
Soc. 2009,9, 171–176. Available online: https://www.funcas.es/wp-content/uploads/Migracion/Articulos/FUNCAS_PS/00
9art17.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2024).
62.
Chesser, S.; Porter, M.M.; Tuckett, A.G. Cultivating citizen science for all: Ethical considerations for research projects involving
diverse and marginalized populations. Int. J. Soc. Res. Method 2020,23, 497–508. [CrossRef]
63.
Cooper, C.B.; Hawn, C.L.; Larson, L.R.; Parrish, J.K.; Bowser, G.; Cavalier, D.; Dunn, R.R.; Haklay, M.; Gupta, K.K.; Jelks, N.O.;
et al. Inclusion in citizen science: The conundrum of rebranding. Science 2021,25, 1386–1388. [CrossRef]
64.
Bryn, A.; Vander Wal, R.; Norton, L.; Hofmeester, T. Citizen science: Data collection by volunteers. In Monitoring Biodiversity:
Combining Environmental and Social Data; Allard, A., Keskitalo, E.C.H., Brown, A., Eds.; Routledge Taylor & Francis Group: Oxford-
shire, UK, 2023; Chapter 6; pp. 108–121. Available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/oa-edit/10.4324/97810031
79245-6/citizen-science-data-collection-volunteers-anders-bryn-ren%C3%A9-van-der-wal-lisa-norton-tim-hofmeester (accessed
on 28 February 2024).
65.
Ibrahim, K.; Khodursky, S.; Yasseri, T. Gender imbalance and spatiotemporal patters of contributions to Citizen Sceince projects:
The case of Zooniverse. Front. Phys. 2021,9, 650720. [CrossRef]
66.
European Research Executive Agency. Breakthroughs in Tackling Climate Change Powered by Citizen Science Projects. Available
online: https://rea.ec.europa.eu/news/breakthroughs-tackling-climate-change-powered-citizen- science-projects-2022-02-21_en
(accessed on 22 October 2023).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
