CitSci.org is a global citizen science software platform and support organization housed at Colorado State University. The mission of CitSci is to help people do high quality citizen science by amplifying impacts and outcomes. This platform hosts over one thousand projects and a diverse volunteer base that has amassed over one million observations of the natural world, focused on biodiversity and ecosystem sustainability. It is a custom platform built using open source components including: PostgreSQL, Symfony, Vue.js, with React Native for the mobile apps. CitSci sets itself apart from other Citizen Science platforms through the flexibility in the types of projects it supports rather than having a singular focus. This flexibility allows projects to define their own datasheets and methodologies. The diversity of programs we host motivated us to take a founding role in the design of the PPSR Core, a set of global, transdisciplinary data and metadata standards for use in Public Participation in Scientific Research (Citizen Science) projects. Through an international partnership between the Citizen Science Association, European Citizen Science Association, and Australian Citizen Science Association, the PPSR team and associated standards enable interoperability of citizen science projects, datasets, and observations. Here we share our experience over the past 10+ years of supporting biodiversity research both as developers of the CitSci.org platform and as stewards of, and contributors to, the PPSR Core standard. Specifically, we share details about: the origin, development, and informatics infrastructure for CitSci our support for biodiversity projects such as population and community surveys our experiences in platform interoperability through PPSR Core working with the Zooniverse, SciStarter, and CyberTracker data quality data sharing goals and use cases. the origin, development, and informatics infrastructure for CitSci our support for biodiversity projects such as population and community surveys our experiences in platform interoperability through PPSR Core working with the Zooniverse, SciStarter, and CyberTracker data quality data sharing goals and use cases. We conclude by sharing overall successes, limitations, and recommendations as they pertain to trust and rigor in citizen science data sharing and interoperability. As the scientific community moves forward, we show that Citizen Science is a key tool to enabling a systems-based approach to ecosystem problems.
more »
« less
Designing a Platform for Ethical Citizen Science: A Case Study of CitSci.org
Involving the public in scientific discovery offers opportunities for engagement, learning, participation, and action. Since its launch in 2007, the CitSci.org platform has supported hundreds of community-driven citizen science projects involving thousands of participants who have generated close to a million scientific measurements around the world. Members using CitSci.org follow their curiosities and concerns to develop, lead, or simply participate in research projects. While professional scientists are trained to make ethical determinations related to the collection of, access to, and use of information, citizen scientists and practitioners may be less aware of such issues and more likely to become involved in ethical dilemmas. In this era of big and open data, where data sharing is encouraged and open science is promoted, privacy and openness considerations can often be overlooked. Platforms that support the collection, use, and sharing of data and personal information need to consider their responsibility to protect the rights to and ownership of data, the provision of protection options for data and members, and at the same time provide options for openness. This requires critically considering both intended and unintended consequences of the use of platforms, data, and volunteer information. Here, we use our journey developing CitSci.org to argue that incorporating customization into platforms through flexible design options for project managers shifts the decision-making from top-down to bottom-up and allows project design to be more responsive to goals. To protect both people and data, we developed—and continue to improve—options that support various levels of “open” and “closed” access permissions for data and membership participation. These options support diverse governance styles that are responsive to data uses, traditional and indigenous knowledge sensitivities, intellectual property rights, personally identifiable information concerns, volunteer preferences, and sensitive data protections. We present a typology for citizen science openness choices, their ethical considerations, and strategies that we are actively putting into practice to expand privacy options and governance models based on the unique needs of individual projects using our platform.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1550463
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10097857
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Citizen science
- Volume:
- 4
- Issue:
- 1
- ISSN:
- 2057-4991
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- Article 14
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Citizen science is a process by which volunteer members of the public, who commonly lack advanced training in science, engage in scientific activities (e.g., data collection) that might otherwise be beyond the reach of professional researchers or practitioners. The purpose of this article is to discuss how citizen‐science projects coordinated by interdisciplinary teams of engineers and social scientists can potentially enhance infrastructure monitoring data and decision‐support models for local communities. The article provides an interdisciplinary definition of infrastructure data quality that extends beyond accuracy to include currency, timeliness, completeness, and equitability. We argue that with this expanded definition of data quality, citizen science can be a viable method for enhancing the quality of infrastructure monitoring data, and ultimately the credibility of risk analysis and decision‐support models that use these data. The article concludes with a set of questions to aid in producing high‐quality infrastructure monitoring data by volunteer citizen scientists.
-
Reddy, S. ; Winter, J.S. ; Padmanabhan, S. (Ed.)AI applications are poised to transform health care, revolutionizing benefits for individuals, communities, and health-care systems. As the articles in this special issue aptly illustrate, AI innovations in healthcare are maturing from early success in medical imaging and robotic process automation, promising a broad range of new applications. This is evidenced by the rapid deployment of AI to address critical challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including disease diagnosis and monitoring, drug discovery, and vaccine development. At the heart of these innovations is the health data required for deep learning applications. Rapid accumulation of data, along with improved data quality, data sharing, and standardization, enable development of deep learning algorithms in many healthcare applications. One of the great challenges for healthcare AI is effective governance of these data—ensuring thoughtful aggregation and appropriate access to fuel innovation and improve patient outcomes and healthcare system efficiency while protecting the privacy and security of data subjects. Yet the literature on data governance has rarely looked beyond important pragmatic issues related to privacy and security. Less consideration has been given to unexpected or undesirable outcomes of healthcare in AI, such as clinician deskilling, algorithmic bias, the “regulatory vacuum”, and lack of public engagement. Amidst growing calls for ethical governance of algorithms, Reddy et al. developed a governance model for AI in healthcare delivery, focusing on principles of fairness, accountability, and transparency (FAT), and trustworthiness, and calling for wider discussion. Winter and Davidson emphasize the need to identify underlying values of healthcare data and use, noting the many competing interests and goals for use of health data—such as healthcare system efficiency and reform, patient and community health, intellectual property development, and monetization. Beyond the important considerations of privacy and security, governance must consider who will benefit from healthcare AI, and who will not. Whose values drive health AI innovation and use? How can we ensure that innovations are not limited to the wealthiest individuals or nations? As large technology companies begin to partner with health care systems, and as personally generated health data (PGHD) (e.g., fitness trackers, continuous glucose monitors, health information searches on the Internet) proliferate, who has oversight of these complex technical systems, which are essentially a black box? To tackle these complex and important issues, it is important to acknowledge that we have entered a new technical, organizational, and policy environment due to linked data, big data analytics, and AI. Data governance is no longer the responsibility of a single organization. Rather, multiple networked entities play a role and responsibilities may be blurred. This also raises many concerns related to data localization and jurisdiction—who is responsible for data governance? In this emerging environment, data may no longer be effectively governed through traditional policy models or instruments.more » « less
-
Building community with rural and underrepresented groups has been a challenge in the field of citizen science. At the University of Alaska Fairbanks, a team of scientists, educators, Extension professionals, and evaluators have joined efforts to take on this challenge across Alaska. The goals for Arctic Harvest-Public Participation in Scientific Research are to: 1) investigate how shifts in environmental conditions affect the fate of subsistence berries and timing of berry loss from plants in fall and winter across Alaska; and 2) improve the participation in and effectiveness of citizen science across diverse audiences, particularly at high latitudes where a high proportion of communities have populations underrepresented in STEM. We present the assets that collaboration across a land grant university brought to the table, and the Winterberry Citizen Science program design elements we have developed to engage our 1080+ volunteer berry citizen scientists ages three through elder across urban and rural, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and formal and informal learning settings. Our interdisciplinary team developed and implemented a program that provides in-person or online support for berry monitoring and data collection, and accommodates different age levels and settings. We also developed and tested an innovative program model that weaves storytelling throughout the citizen science learning cycle, from berries stories from the larger community, to stories of the citizen science process, to stories developed from berry data being collected and applied to future scenarios in a changing climate. The variety of program modifications we created have been highly effective helping reach a variety of settings and age levels. In both informal and formal learning environments in our first two years of the program we have had 568 pre-K and elementary-aged (age 3-12), 424 secondary-aged (age 12-18) youth participants and 107 adults (ages 18+), with 44% of participants coming from groups underrepresented in STEM, and 100% of groups completing berry monitoring throughout the fall. These results highlight the importance of designing the citizen science program with cultural relevance, program delivery options, and relationships between participants and scientists, while remaining committed to making a substantial scientific contribution.more » « less
-
Background Social networks such as Twitter offer the clinical research community a novel opportunity for engaging potential study participants based on user activity data. However, the availability of public social media data has led to new ethical challenges about respecting user privacy and the appropriateness of monitoring social media for clinical trial recruitment. Researchers have voiced the need for involving users’ perspectives in the development of ethical norms and regulations. Objective This study examined the attitudes and level of concern among Twitter users and nonusers about using Twitter for monitoring social media users and their conversations to recruit potential clinical trial participants. Methods We used two online methods for recruiting study participants: the open survey was (1) advertised on Twitter between May 23 and June 8, 2017, and (2) deployed on TurkPrime, a crowdsourcing data acquisition platform, between May 23 and June 8, 2017. Eligible participants were adults, 18 years of age or older, who lived in the United States. People with and without Twitter accounts were included in the study. Results While nearly half the respondents—on Twitter (94/603, 15.6%) and on TurkPrime (509/603, 84.4%)—indicated agreement that social media monitoring constitutes a form of eavesdropping that invades their privacy, over one-third disagreed and nearly 1 in 5 had no opinion. A chi-square test revealed a positive relationship between respondents’ general privacy concern and their average concern about Internet research (P<.005). We found associations between respondents’ Twitter literacy and their concerns about the ability for researchers to monitor their Twitter activity for clinical trial recruitment (P=.001) and whether they consider Twitter monitoring for clinical trial recruitment as eavesdropping (P<.001) and an invasion of privacy (P=.003). As Twitter literacy increased, so did people’s concerns about researchers monitoring Twitter activity. Our data support the previously suggested use of the nonexceptionalist methodology for assessing social media in research, insofar as social media-based recruitment does not need to be considered exceptional and, for most, it is considered preferable to traditional in-person interventions at physical clinics. The expressed attitudes were highly contextual, depending on factors such as the type of disease or health topic (eg, HIV/AIDS vs obesity vs smoking), the entity or person monitoring users on Twitter, and the monitored information. Conclusions The data and findings from this study contribute to the critical dialogue with the public about the use of social media in clinical research. The findings suggest that most users do not think that monitoring Twitter for clinical trial recruitment constitutes inappropriate surveillance or a violation of privacy. However, researchers should remain mindful that some participants might find social media monitoring problematic when connected with certain conditions or health topics. Further research should isolate factors that influence the level of concern among social media users across platforms and populations and inform the development of more clear and consistent guidelines.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.227
