IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0178778.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding the (inter)disciplinary and institutional diversity of citizen science: A survey of current practice in Germany and Austria

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa Pettibone
  • Katrin Vohland
  • David Ziegler

Abstract

Citizen science has become more popular in recent years, quickly taking on a variety of potentially conflicting characteristics: a way to collect massive data sets at relatively low cost, a way to break science out of the ivory tower and better engage the public, an approach to educate lay people in scientific methods. But the extent of current citizen science practice—the types of actors and scientific disciplines who take part—is still poorly understood. This article builds on recent surveys of citizen science in PLOS One by analyzing citizen science practice in Germany and Austria through the projects on two online platforms. We find evidence supporting previous findings that citizen science is a phenomenon strongest in biodiversity and environmental monitoring research, but at home in a number of scientific fields, such as history and geography. In addition, our survey method yields new insights into citizen science projects initiated by non-scientific actors. We close by discussing additional methodological considerations in attempting to present a cross-disciplinary overview of citizen science.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa Pettibone & Katrin Vohland & David Ziegler, 2017. "Understanding the (inter)disciplinary and institutional diversity of citizen science: A survey of current practice in Germany and Austria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178778
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0178778
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178778
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178778&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0178778?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ria Follett & Vladimir Strezov, 2015. "An Analysis of Citizen Science Based Research: Usage and Publication Patterns," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Christopher Kullenberg & Dick Kasperowski, 2016. "What Is Citizen Science? – A Scientometric Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0178778. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.