Abstract
Science is supposedly meritocratic, and this means that it is important for scientists to be familiar with the mechanisms of how credit, for instance, in the form of authorship, acknowledgments, or awards, is bestowed. In citizen science – research activities in which volunteers are actively involved and where the research project and its success rely on those volunteer contributions – there are less clear guidelines and practices for awarding and valuing credit. This chapter introduces different forms of citizen science, disentangles concepts of credit, fairness, and incentives and considers their relevance in citizen science. Then some specific forms of expressing credit are discussed: prizes and awards, authorship, acknowledgments, and naming, including eponyms. Finally, some considerations to be taken into account when thinking of how to give credit in citizen science are proposed: To apply a wide conception of credit, to apply a wide conception of contributions and contributors, and to err on the side of generosity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Albert, A., Balázs, B., Butkevičienė, E., Mayer, K., & Perelló, J. (2021). Citizen social science: New and established approaches to participation in social research. In K. Vohland, A. Land-Zandstra, L. Ceccaroni, R. Lemmens, J. Perelló, M. Ponti, R. Samson, & K. Wagenknecht (Eds.), The science of citizen science. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4
Australian Museum. (2022, July 14). Innovation in Citizen Science. https://australian.museum/get-involved/eureka-prizes/enter/innovation-citizen-science/
Australian Research Council. (n.d.). Excellence in research for Australia. Retrieved June 30, 2022 from https://www.arc.gov.au/evaluating-research/excellence-research-australia
Ayastuy, M. D., Torres, D., & Fernández, S. (2021). Adaptive gamification in collaborative systems, a systematic mapping study. Computer Science Review, 39, 10333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosrev.2020.100333
Baard, P., & Sandin, P. (2022). Principlism and citizen science: The possibilities and limitations of principlism for guiding responsible citizen science conduct. Research Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161221116558
Beretta, M. (2019). Names as rewards: The ambiguous role of eponyms in the history of science. Nuncius, 34, 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1163/18253911-03402002
Bracko, O., Vinarcsik, L. K., Cruz Hernández, J. C., Ruiz-Uribe, N. E., Haft-Javaherian, M., Falkenhain, K., Ramanauskaite, E. M., Ali, M., Mohapatra, A., Swallow, M., Njiru, B. N., Muse, V., Stall Catchers Contributors, Michelucci, P. E., Nishimura, N., & Schaffer, C. B. (2019). High fat diet worsens pathology and impairment in an Alzheimer’s mouse model, but not by synergistically decreasing cerebral blood flow. BioRxiv, 2019.12.16.878397. https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.16.878397.
Brandslet, S. (2018, August 2). Citizen scientists get new slugs named after them. Norwegian SciTech News https://norwegianscitechnews.com/2018/02/citizen-scientists-get-new-slugs-named/
Chen-Kraus, C., Farmer, C., Guevara, E. E., Meier, K. Watts, D. P. & Widness, J. (2021). Whom do primate names honor? Rethinking primate eponyms. International Journal of Primatology, 42, 980–986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10764-021-00252-0
Cooper, C., & Lewenstein, B. (2016). Two meanings of citizen science. In D. Cavalier & E. B. Kennedy (Eds.), The rightful place of science: Citizen science (pp. 51–61). Arizona State University Press.
Cooper, C. B., Shirk, J., & Zuckerberg, B. (2014). The invisible prevalence of citizen science in global research: Migratory birds and climate change. PLoS One, 9(9), e106508. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106508
Cutas, D., & Shaw, D. (2015). Writers blocked: On the wrongs of research co-authorship and some possible strategies for improvement. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21, 1315–1329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9606-0
Desrochers, N., Paul-Hus, A., Haustein, S., Costas, R., Mongeon, P., Quan-Haase, A., Bowman, T. D., Pecoskie, J., Tsou, A., & Larivière, V. (2018). Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media: Symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science. Social Science Information, 57(2), 223–248. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018417752089
Else, H. (2022). Mammoth UK research assessment concludes as leaders eye radical shakeup. Nature, 605, 603. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01310-0
Haklay, M., Dörler, D., Heigl, F., Manzoni, M., Hecker, S., & Vohland, K. (2021). What is citizen science? The challenges of definition. In K. Vohland, A. Land-Zandstra, L. Ceccaroni, R. Lemmens, J. Perelló, M. Ponti, R. Samson, & K. Wagenknecht (Eds.), The science of citizen science (pp. 13–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_2
Hansson, S. O. (2017). Editorial: Who should be an author? Theoria, 83, 99–102. https://doi.org/10.1111/theo.12116
Hansson, K., & Dahlgren, A. N. (2022). Crowdsourcing historical photographs: Autonomy and control at the Copenhagen City Archives. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 31, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-021-09418-z
Heesen, R. (2019). The credit incentive to be a maverick. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 76, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2018.11.007
Heinisch, B., Oswald, K., Weißpflug, M., Shuttleworth, S., & Belknap, G. (2021). Citizen humanities. In K. Vohland, A. Land-Zandstra, L. Ceccaroni, R. Lemmens, J. Perelló, M. Ponti, R. Samson, & K. Wagenknecht (Eds.), The science of citizen science. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_6
ICMJE. (2022). Defining the role of authors and contributors. Retrieved August 17, 2022 from https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
Kasperowski, D., & Hagen, N. (2022). Making particularity travel: Trust and citizen science data in Swedish environmental governance. Social Studies of Science, 52(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312722108524
Lakomý, M., Hlavová, R., Machackova, H., Bohlin, G., Lindholm, M., Bertero, M. G., & Dettenhofer, M. (2020). The motivation for citizens’ involvement in life sciences research is predicted by age and gender. PLoS One, 15(8), e0237140. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237140
Lee, J., Kladwang, W., Lee, M., Cantu, D., Azizyan, M., Kim, H., Limpaecher, A., Gaikwad, S., Yoon, S., Treuille, A., Das, R., & EteRNA Participants. (2015). RNA design rules from a massive open laboratory. PNAS, 111, 2122–2127. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.131303911
Liboiron, M., Ammendolia, J., Winsor, K., Zahara, A., Bradshaw, H., Melvin, J., Mather, C., Dawe, N., Wells, E., Liboiron, F., Fürst, B., Coyle, C., Saturno, J., Novacefski, M., Westscott, S. & Liboiron, G. (2017). Equity in author order: A feminist ‘laboratory’s approach. Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience, 3(2), 1–17
Louisiana Bucket Brigade. (n.d.). About us. Retrieved September 19, 2022 from https://labucketbrigade.org/about-us/
Merton, R. K. (1973). The Sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Edited and with an Introduction by Norman W. Storer. University of Chicago Press.
OeAD. (n.d.). Become a citizen science award project. Retrieved June 30, 2022 from https://zentrumfuercitizenscience.at/en/for-researchers/become-a-citizen-science-award-project
Ottinger, G. (2010). Buckets of resistance: Standards and the effectiveness of citizen science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35, 244–270.
Penders, B. (2017). All for one or one for all? Authorship and the cross-sectoral valuation of credit in nutrition science. Accountability in Research, 24(8), 433–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2017.1386565
Pimple, K. D. (2002). Six domains of research ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-002-0018-1
Raddick, M. J., Bracey, G., Gay, P. L., Lintott, C. J., Cardamone, C., Murray, P., Schawinski, K., Szalay, A. S., & Vandenberg, J. (2013). Galaxy Zoo: Motivations of citizen scientists. Astronomy Education Review, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.3847/AER2011021
Rasmussen, L. M. (2020). Research ethics in citizen science. In A. S. Iltis & D. MacKay (Eds.), Oxford handbook of research ethics. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190947750.013.36
Resnik, D. B. (1997). A proposal for a new system of credit allocation in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 237–243.
Resnik, D. B. (1998). The ethics of science: An introduction. Routledge.
Resnik, D. B. (2019). Institutional review board oversight of citizen science research involving human subjects. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19, 21–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2019.1619864
Robinson, L. D., Cawthray, J. L., West, S. E., Bonn, A., & Ansine, J. (2018). Ten principles of citizen science. In A. Bonn, S. Hecker, M. Haklay, A. Bowser, Z. Makuch, & J. Vogel (Eds.), Citizen Science: Innovation in Open Science, Society and Policy (pp. 27–40). UCL Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv550cf2.9
Rohden, F., Kullenberg, C., Hagen, N., & Kasperowski, D. (2019). Tagging, pinging, linking – User roles in virtual citizen science forums. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.181
Röstlund, L. (2022). Skogslandet: En granskning. Bokförlaget Forum.
Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz-Ariza, M. Á., Luzardo Briceño, M., & Gabbour, G. (2011). Scholarly gratitude in five geographical contexts: a diachronic and cross-generic approach of the acknowledgment paratext in medical discourse (1950–2010). Scientometrics, 86, 763–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0329-y
Schilthuizen, M., Lim, J. P., van Peursen, A. D. P., Alfano, M., Bikas Jenging, A., Cicuzza, D., Escoubas, P., Grafe, U., Ja, J., Koomen, P., Krotoski, A., Lavezzari, D., Lim, L., Maarschall, R., Slik, F., Steele, D., Ting, D. T. W., van Zeeland, I., & Nunjic, I. (2020). Craspedotropis gretathunbergae, a new species of Cyclophoridae (Gastropoda: Caenogastropoda), discovered and described on a field course to Kuala Belalong rainforest, Brunei. Biodiversity Data Journal, 8, e47484. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.8.e47484
Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. https://www.vr.se/download/18.5639980c162791bbfe697882/1555334908942/Good-Research-Practice_VR_2017.pdf
Tracy, B. H. (2022). What’s in a fish species name and when to change it? Fisheries, 47, 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10750
Ward-Fear, G., Pauly, G. B., Vendetti, J. E., & Shine, R. (2020). Authorship protocols must change to credit Citizen Scientists. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 35, 187–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2019.10.007
Wiggins, A., & Wilbanks, J. (2019). The rise of citizen science in health and biomedical research. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19, 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2019.1619859
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Formas, Grant 2019-00548 “Research Ethics for Citizen Science.” The sections on authorship have been developed in discussions with Gert Helgesson and William Bülow O’Nils.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Sandin, P., Baard, P. (2024). Citizen Science and Credit. In: Eaton, S.E. (eds) Second Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5_144
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-54144-5_144
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-54143-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-54144-5
eBook Packages: EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education