Volunteer participation in citizen science projects

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to assess the current state of citizen science projects and reveal the role of volunteers in the research process. This is achieved by performing a literature review and content analysis of three international and one state-owned citizen science platforms (Wikipedia, SciStarter, CitSci and Precipita) that contain more than 800 research projects. Projects have been analyzed according to four categories: the academic disciplines, the way the project is designed, the phases of the research in which volunteers participate, and the tasks they perform. The results show that projects in the arts, humanities, and social sciences disciplines are almost non-existent. In addition, in the field of natural and physical sciences, projects are fostered with a top-down approach and volunteers participate primarily in the data collection phase in order to obtain a large volume of data, thereby receiving more financing from the European Union.

Full text

El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 827
VOLUNTEER PARTICIPATION IN CITIZEN
SCIENCE PROJECTS
Participación de voluntarios en proyectos
de ciencia ciudadana
Núria Ferran-Ferrer
Núria Ferran-Ferrer is a lecturer at the Department of Informaon and Communicaon Sciences,
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC) since 2005. She had her European doctoral degree in 2010
at the Universitat Barcelona, with a research stage at Sheeld University (2009). In her disserta-
on she studied the transfer of knowledge, abilies and atudes of informaon-related beha-
viours from professional and social to private life. She has been assistant professor of Informaon
Management and User Studies from 2004 to 2008 in the Informaon Management and Journa-
lism Bachelors at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, and she is at present teaching at UOC
research methodologies for user centred design processes, user experience and human-computer
interacon. She is currently involved in a naonal funded research project on open science where
she is supervising a PhD dissertaon about the atudes and knowledge of academics towards
the reuse of academic works. Her research interests span from open content and parcipaon on
science to user experiences with digital media and mobile devices.
hp://orcid.org/0000-0002-9037-8837
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
Rambla del Poblenou, 156. 08018 Barcelona, Spain
nferranf@uoc.edu
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to assess the current state of cizen science projects and reveal the role of volunteers in
the research process. This is achieved by performing a literature review and content analysis of three internaonal and one
state-owned cizen science plaorms (Wikipedia, SciStarter, CitSci and Precipita) that contain more than 800 research pro-
jects. Projects have been analyzed according to four categories: the academic disciplines, the way the project is designed,
the phases of the research in which volunteers parcipate, and the tasks they perform. The results show that projects in
the arts, humanies, and social sciences disciplines are almost non-existent. In addion, in the eld of natural and physical
sciences, projects are fostered with a top-down approach and volunteers parcipate primarily in the data collecon phase
in order to obtain a large volume of data, thereby receiving more nancing from the European Union.
Keywords
Cizen science; Crowd science; Big data; Open data; Social sciences; Arts; Humanies; AHSS.
Resumen
Estado de la cuesón de los proyectos de ciencia ciudadana, profundizando en el papel de los voluntarios en el proceso
de invesgación. Se realiza una revisión bibliográca y se analiza el contenido de tres plataformas de la ciencia ciudadana
de dimensión internacional y una de propiedad estatal (Wikipedia, SciStarter, CitSci y Precipita) que conenen más de 800
proyectos de invesgación. Los proyectos han sido analizados según cuatro variables: las disciplinas académicas, su diseño,
la fase de la invesgación en que los voluntarios parcipan y las tareas que realizan. Los resultados demuestran que este
po de proyectos en ciencias sociales, arte y humanidades son casi inexistentes. Pero en el ámbito de las ciencias naturales
y sicas, estos proyectos se diseñan desde arriba hacia abajo, los voluntarios parcipan en la fase de recogida de datos para
proporcionar un gran volumen de datos y reciben más nanciación de la Unión Europea.
Palabras clave
Ciencia ciudadana; Datos masivos; Datos en abierto; Ciencias sociales; Arte; Humanidades; AHSS.
Ferran-Ferrer, Núria (2015). “Volunteer parcipaon in cizen science projects”. El profesional de la información, v. 24,
n. 6, pp. 827-837.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.3145/epi.2015.nov.15
Manuscript received on 10-06-2015
Accepted on 25-08-2015

Núria Ferran-Ferrer
828 El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407
1. Introducon
The number of devices that capture, produce, and transmit
data has risen exponenally in the last 15 years. Along with
this explosion of data are new ways of resolving problems
and posing quesons, which are already changing how va-
lue is added to the economy, how polics and society are
organised and how science is carried out (Subirós; De-Vi-
cente, 2014).
It is in this new data environment the terms crowd scien-
ce or cizen science1 are used to refer to cizens involved
in scienc research projects. These projects can be wor-
ked on in a massive scale –parcipang many cizens- and
generate large volumes of high-quality data with scienc
results on par with any other research project carried out
by professional researchers (Hunter et al., 2012; Wiggins;
Crowston, 2012).
Using cizen sciensts, research is not limited by locaon
and data can be analyzed anywhere a computer can be
found. It is no longer a playing eld limited to universies,
academic instuons, laboratories, or the research and in-
novaon departments of companies (Franzoni; Sauermann,
2014). Cizens can now parcipate in scienc projects
thanks to mobile technologies and the popularizaon of
web 2.0
Cizen science parcipaon is requested through open
calls. The tasks generally reserved for cizens are the co-
llecon of data for natural and physical sciences projects,
whether the data are on the environment (weather obser-
vaon, research on the quality of water, sighng of birds
or bueries, etc.), astronomy, or biochemistry (Wiggins;
Crowston, 2012; Dawson, 2012). In projects in the elds
of natural and physical sciences, the objecves usually pur-
sue “the improvement of knowledge, the conservaon of
the dierent components of the natural environment and
ensure that the large volume of general data (big data) fo-
llow the protocols which guarantee scienc validity and
applicability” (Museu de Ciències Naturals; Instució Cata-
lana d’Història Natural, 2010). Cizen parcipaon makes
it possible to obtain massive quanes of data at a low cost
by means of validity systems and vericaon tools, and the
fact that volunteers are not required to have any specic
academic training, the training they do receive is limited,
and their contribuons anonymous, pose no hindrance to
scienc research methods (Hunter et al., 2012).
Cizen science projects do not normally include research
ones related to daily life nor closely linked to arts, humani-
es, and the social sciences (AHSS) (Purdam, 2014). It is also
uncommon for volunteers to generate boom-up iniaves
for the design, analysis, and publicaon of research results.
The following secon includes a thorough review of the li-
terature related to cizen science projects and a discussion
about four disseminaon plaorms; emphasis is placed on
user tasks, themac areas, project structure, and the im-
portance aached to the quanty of data collected. The re-
search and innovaon funding programs are also analyzed
within the framework of the European Union.
2. Characteriscs of cizen science projects
In the nineteenth century scienc research was not limited
to sciensts. Instead, ordinary cizens who loved science
parcipated in it, especially those who were intrigued by
the biodiversity of our planet.
But it was not unl recent years,
that there has been an explosion
of research projects involving
average cizens.
Compared with nineteenth cen-
tury naturalists, today’s scien-
c cizens enjoy the benets
of access to informaon, online
communicaon technologies,
and crowdsourcing capabilies
(Busch, 2013)2.
The paper White paper on cizen
science in Europe (Socienze Con-
sorum, 2014) includes a broad
denion of cizen science and
encompasses any and all types
of acve contribuon to scien-
ce through intellectual eorts,
knowledge, tools, and resources.
The belief is that an exchange
has to take place: parcipants
add value to the projects and, in
exchange, they receive learning,
Crowd science or citizen science are used
to refer to citizens involved in scientific
research projects
http://boinc.berkeley.edu

Volunteer participation in citizen science projects
El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 829
skills and knowledge, among other
aspects (Zhao; Zhu, 2014).
Perelló (2014) states that the success
of these projects began in 1999 with
the project Se@home, which used
the personal computers of volunteers
to detect signs of arcial intelligen-
ce beyond Earth; subsequently other
projects were developed. For exam-
ple, the plaorm Boinc which began
in 2002 has had hundreds of thou-
sands of volunteers and more than
twenty projects —its success can be
seen in the numerous arcles that
have been published in presgious
scienc journals as a result of cizen
parcipaon.
The parcipaon rate and data collec-
on gures of cizen science projects
tend to be large and successful. For
example, Zooniverse is a project that
receives small contribuons from
over a million volunteers.
Cizen sciensts have examined and
classied the shape of the images
taken by a roboc telescope, provi-
ding evidence of paerns that is much more accurate than
any computer program could produce. As a result, 300 mi-
llion pieces of data have been analyzed, 150 million galaxies
registered, and scienc arcles with the results have been
published in more than y peer-reviewed publicaons.
The work would not have been nished nearly as early, nor
the analysis of such a large quanty of data completed so
quickly, with a smaller team of professional sciensts.
The parcipants in the projects do not necessarily have scien-
c training, nor is it required. Despite this de-professionali-
zaon and the creaon of a large quanty of data, the pro-
jects follow the scienc method. To ensure quality, the data
collecon protocols have to be established prior to the study
and involvement of cizen sciensts. Once the data have been
collected, in the analysis phase, it is worthwhile repeang the
observaons or established quality control methods (Antelio
et al., 2012). There are so many people collecng data that the
likelihood that the data are inaccurate is virtually non-existent.
Cizen parcipaon projects are within the framework of
a global and far-reaching movement that promotes, among
other things, free access to open-source contents and tools.
This movement, called Commons, includes in its ideals
free access to natural resources, free spaces, heritage and
knowledge, as they are understood to be part of the “com-
mon good” and, hence, they must be preserved and acces-
sible in a universal manner (Tomales Bay Instute, 2006).
Cizen parcipaon in science shares two essenal charac-
teriscs with the Commons movement: open data and open
parcipaon (Franzoni; Sauermann, 2014). Thus, the data
and algorithms to resolve problems that the projects produ-
ce or the resulng publicaons have to be accessible to all.
Research data being made public came to be a fairly stan-
dard pracce with studies on the genome at the beginning
of the ‘80s, and in 1996, at the conference in Bermuda (Ber-
muda, 1996), all of the sciensts in this eld agreed that this
should be the norm if funding was being received from pu-
blic sources. Taking this from a polical wish to reality was
the principal contribuon of the Berlin declaraon (2003)
on open access to knowledge in all academic elds. It esta-
blished that instuons should encourage and even require
sciensts to provide open access to the results of their own
research (Nielsen, 2011).
Among the many denions of the concept of cizen scien-
ce, open access to research results is evidently included, but
it goes one step further in that it also opens up access to
eld data (Franzoni; Sauermann, 2014). The current pro-
gram in force for the nancing of European research and
innovaon, Horizon 2020, coincides with this vision, and all
the projects that receive funding are obliged to give access
to their publicaons and make their research data accessi-
ble (European Commission, 2013).
Regarding opening up projects to parcipaon, cizen
science projects tend to be collaborave and virtual, using
2.0 iniaves like those of Wikipedia or OpenStreetMap,
which use the wisdom of the masses (wisdom of crowds).
hp://www.wikipedia.org
hp://www.openstreetmap.org
https://www.zooniverse.org/projects
There are so many people collecting
data that the likelihood that the data are
inaccurate is virtually non-existent

Núria Ferran-Ferrer
830 El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407
Thus, the opportunity provided by projects carried out this
way is that they can reach everyone, everywhere, since
praccally everyone is guaranteed to have Internet access
and a smartphone. These aforemenoned devices, which
incorporate applicaons and tools with cameras, registers,
and geolocators, among others, mean that anyone can have
sensors, termed “wearables”, on them, which can send data
that can be collected anywhere in the world (Wechsler,
2014).
Science lovers, like any individual from any point on the pla-
net, use connected devices, which produce data, which in
many cases are transmied via the Internet. The sources of
the data can be meteorological staons, polluon sensors,
and even mobile telephones, as they have light sensors in-
corporated —those of proximity, sound, GPS posioning
and barometer, among many others. McLuhan’s paradigm
on technology, understood as an extension of the human
body, which allows it and its cognive funcons to be am-
plied (1966), is executed to its fullest extent in the eld of
cizen science.
With the data generated and observaons made by the
parcipants, it is a demonstrable fact that the principal ob-
jecves of these projects is the capturing of big data at a
reduced cost, so that professional sciensts can invesgate
and solve research quesons (Trumbull et al., 2000; Clark;
Illman, 2001). Science lovers are contributors to the project;
therefore, the implicaon of the volunteers in the methodo-
logy and its design is contributory and not collaborave or
co-creave (Bonney et al., 2009).
3. Project disseminaon
plaorms for cizen
parcipaon in science
As has been previously stated,
for a research project to be con-
sidered a cizen science project,
it is essenal that it be open to
all. Based on this premise, va-
rious plaorms, which help to
disseminate acve projects, were
analysed. The most common dis-
seminaon plaorms, providing
access to more than 800 projects,
are Wikipedia, SciStarter, CitSci;
this study also wanted to size up
what was happing in Spain, whe-
re there is only one plaorm for
cizen science projects, Precipita.
The analysis was conducted from
December 2014 to January 2015.
The following is a descripon and
analysis of the content of these
plaorms in relaon to four cate-
gories of study:
a) Discipline
Derived from the work of Purdam
(2014) to determine the themac
eld and the proporon of physical and natural science pro-
jects in relaon to arts, humanies and social sciences.
b) Task
Refers to the acvies performed by volunteers, to see what
they do, the level of diculty of the acvity and the stages
of the research process in which they are involved. It is a
category resulng from the research of Wiggins & Crowston
(2012).
c) Volume of data
Whether this is to priorize the qualitave or quantave
aspect (Subirós; De-Vicente, 2014) or, to the contrary, to
pursue the more qualitave and singular. This category has
been created on a well-founded basis from the analysis of
transcripons and interviews carried out on dierent inia-
ves in cizen science in the sphere of social sciences and
humanies.
d) Design of research projects
How the research iniave has been planned; if it has been
designed exclusively by researchers (top-down) and conse-
quently with projects of the contributory type, or of a social
origin with cizen parcipaon (boom-up) with collabora-
ve or co-creave methodology (Gómez-Ferri, 2014).
For each plaorm the themac classicaon of the search
system for projects was analyzed in order to ascertain the
academic discipline for each project. Then each project des-
cripon was analyzed in order to gather the data for the rest
of the study variables. The following presents the analysis
http://www.openstreetmap.org

Volunteer participation in citizen science projects
El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 831
of the more than 800 cizen science projects
through these four plaorms:
Wikipedia: List of cizen science pro-
jects
hp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cizen_
science_projects
It is an entry point in Wikipedia with a list
of science projects with cizen parcipaon
that are acve, and a list of closed projects
so that “ordinary people can contribute sig-
nicantly to scienc research”.
a) Discipline: the majority of the projects are
of the natural and physical sciences type (81
projects). The most predominant disciplines
are: biology (11 projects), ornithology (12)
and astronomy (5). Only one of the 81 pro-
jects is from social sciences and it is linguis-
cs.
b) Task: the volunteers’ main acvity is focu-
sed on the data collecon phase. Main ac-
vies are related to the collecon of data
through transcripons and observaons.
c) Volume of data: the projects aach im-
portance to the quality of data collected. A
project goes from “acve” to “closed” on the
plaorm when its data collecon objecves
are reached. This is what we call big data. By way of exam-
ple, there is the project Old weather, which at the beginning
of 2013 already had 12% of the logs completed (19,604 pa-
ges); when it reaches 100% it will moved to the completed
projects. A large number of data is required to reach the
goal.
d) Design of research projects:
the projects are clearly top-
down. The researchers or their
enes propose and make
known the calls for parcipa-
on.
SciStarter
hp://scistarter.com
This North American plaorm
indexes and enables cizens to
sign up to parcipate in more
than 600 scienc projects. It is
accompanied by a very popular
blog, Project Finder, which an-
nually highlights the ten best ci-
zen science projects from the
metrics of your browser.
http://scistarter.com/
blog/2014/01/top-13-citizen-
science-projects-2013/#sthash.
lw1PI2PN.dpbs
a) Discipline: the majority of
the projects are in the area of
the natural and physical scien-
ces, although this is dicult to count because there are
both “animals” and “birds” categories. Only the categories
“archaeology” and “educaon”, of a total of 23 catego-
ries, could be considered to be from the eld of arts and
humanies. In the case of educaonal projects there are
http://whaling.oldweather.org
http://scistarter.com

Núria Ferran-Ferrer
832 El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407
no research aims other than training parcipants through
scienc acvity. Among the objecves of the plaorm, the
expression “get their hands dirty with science” stands out,
and so, of the hundreds of projects that can be found on
this plaorm, the majority are experiments outdoors or in
laboratories.
b) Task: the projects that the plaorm gathers focus on tasks
relang to the collecon of data. Nevertheless, the high
number of projects focused on training stands out, and it
is a disncve feature of the plaorm’s mission which is to
get primary and secondary schools to parcipate in science
in a fun way.
c) Volume of data: a great deal of importance is aached to
quanty. The slogan of the plaorm is “to liaise millions of
scienc cizens with millions of projects”. The aim of the
plaorm is to be a link between science and society, so that
volunteers are not only involved in research processes but
also in the search to promote the role of science and tech-
nology in society.
d) Design of the research project: clearly a top-down ap-
proach. The plaorm possesses a specic secon to register
projects, which carries the label “For sciensts”, a tle that
clearly lets users know that only researchers can propose
projects.
CitSci
hp://citsci.org
This plaorm empowers cizens in their scienc interests.
It oers support, tools, and resources for scienc proces-
ses, which are intended to be done with cizen parcipa-
on. The plaorm was inially created with money from the
Naonal Science Foundaon (NSF) and gives support/back-
up to monitoring acvies and observaons, but it now con-
sists of volunteers connected to
research groups and deals with a
variety of projects. The plaorm
is presented as “your research
partner” because it is oered as a
back-up to the research process.
a) Discipline: the majority of pro-
jects are of the natural and physi-
cal sciences type.
b) Task: volunteers parcipate in
the collecon of data. Emphasis
is placed on the fact that their
tasks should respond to mova-
ons related to learning and fun.
c) Volume of data: importance
is placed on quanty. By way of
example, the plaorm emphasi-
zes that to date (November 2014)
it has managed more than 100
projects and has contributed to
almost 30,000 observaons of
species.
d) Design of the research project:
projects are top-down, despite
the fact that the vocaon of the plaorm is boom-up, as
the objecve sought is to give support to research proces-
ses.
Precipita
hp://www.precipita.es/descubre.html
This plaorm launched in 2014 and was created and pro-
moted by the Spanish Foundaon for Science and Technolo-
gy (Fecyt) and currently has about een projects through
which cizens can parcipate in science. The creaon of
the Fecyt in Spain coincided with the expansion of a new
model to support the relaonship between science and the
public. Addionally, the Spanish law on science, technolo-
gy and innovaon (2011)3 includes the acve parcipaon
of the cizen in its general objecves. However, as Gómez-
Ferri (2014) observed, there is no indicaon as to how this
law will be implemented. Precipita is driven by the slogan
“Acvang collecve science”, and the cizen collabora-
on proposed is based on economic terms. The plaorm is
called “Precipita” and, in the video explaining the philoso-
phy of the plaorm, the metaphor of cizen contribuon
used is the chemical reacon of “precipitaon” which, as
recounted in the video, adds “the small and nal element
for everything to change”.
a) Discipline: it only focuses on natural and physical sciences
projects and does not include any human or social sciences
projects. The search categories are: biomedicine, medicine,
agriculture, computer science and computer technology,
earth sciences, biology, mathemacs, biology, physics, spa-
ce sciences, and chemistry.
b) Task: the volunteers contribute through donaons.
c) Volume of data: there are currently more projects geared
to the disseminaon of science in society.
hp://citsci.org

Volunteer participation in citizen science projects
El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 833
d) Design of research projects: the
plaorm is clearly aimed at research
teams since it is structured into
two parts —one for searching for
projects and the other for sharing
projects. For a user to contribute to
a project it is necessary to register
with the site and two requirements
must be fullled: the candidate
must belong to a public research
centre and must have contributed
to scienc publicaons or dissemi-
naon in the last two years.
Financing of European
research projects through
cizen parcipaon
The current European program for
funding research and innovaon,
Horizon 2020 (H2020), aims to
deepen the relaonship between
science and society. To achieve
this, H2020 wants to promote the
involvement of civil society in re-
search and innovaon by promong
science educaon, making scienc
knowledge more accessible, and de-
veloping research and innovaon agendas which deal with
the concerns and expectaons of society (Ocial EC for Ho-
rizon 2020, 2014).
The White paper on cizen science for Europe (Socienze
Consorum, 2014), also promoted by the EU, highlights
the agship iniaves of Horizon 2020 related with cizen
science parcipaon. These iniaves are:
- Digital agenda for Europe: the link between society and
science is based on reinvigorang the economy and, sup-
porng cizens and businesses by making the most of ICT.
- Innovaon union: it is worth highlighng that Europe has
an opportunity for design, creavity, and social innova-
on.
- Youth on the move: emphasis is placed on the fact that
learning does not just happen in the classroom.
- An industrial policy for the globalisaon era: emphasis is
placed on making a much needed change towards sustai-
nability.
- An agenda for new skills and jobs: it is necessary for vo-
lunteers to develop new skills, especially in science, tech-
nology, engineering and mathemacs, the so-called STEM
elds. And
- European plaorm against poverty and social exclusion:
cizen science parcipaon is considered to be an ele-
ment of social integraon, since it encourages self-lear-
ning.
The proposals that receive the most funding from the Eu-
ropean Union within the framework of the Horizon 2020
program for projects with cizen parcipaon are called
Cizens’ observatories. These are projects in which the vo-
lunteers collect data, mostly in the eld of the environment,
to complement the observaons of the ocial system and,
ocially and indirectly, to raise awareness among the local
populaon and empower it.
In more specic elds, the EU has already nanced 17 ci-
zen science projects (Socienze Consorum, 2013). These
projects gured in the 7th Framework programme, which -
nanced research and innovaon from 2007 to 2013. The sha-
red feature of the projects was that they gathered together
various case studies or sub-projects involving cizen science.
The sub-projects generally focused on the discipline of the
natural and physical sciences and the research design was ca-
rried out by a group of researchers. Volunteers provided data
as if they were sensors distributed throughout the territory
(for instance, to monitor animals, water, space, climate). They
were allowed their personal computers to be connected re-
motely and used for the purpose at hand. Of the 17 projects,
just 2 (Socienze and Engage) included iniaves outside the
scope of natural science, technologies, or mathemacs and
focused on aspects of a more of human and arsc nature.
For example, Socienze was based in Saragossa Spain, but
the experiment was conducted in Barcelona within the fra-
mework of the Sonar 2014 fesval, with parcipants crea-
ng musical paerns from a set of audios or performing
tasks such as image classicaon.
5. Discussion
In the last decade, we have witnessed a paradoxical pheno-
menon which suggests that the relaonship between scien-
ce and society is evolving. On the one hand, although we are
part of a society that is technologically and economically ad-
vanced, where the development and applicaon of scienc
knowledge are essenal and largely a socioeconomic impe-
rave, its cizens are in average disinterested in themes of a
hp://www.precipita.es/descubre.html

Núria Ferran-Ferrer
834 El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407
scienc and technological nature. On the other hand there
are new ways for people considered to be “non-experts” to
parcipate acvely in science (Gómez-Ferri, 2014), thanks
to the democrazaon of knowledge and access to the Net.
As described in the review, cizen science projects in
the arts, humanies, and social sciences (AHSS) are few.
Although the proporon of investment in research and in-
novaon in the sciences and engineering versus the social
sciences and humanies is usually 70:30 (INE, 2003), the
proporon for cizen science research projects is 99:1. For
instance, in Wikipedia, out of a list of 81 projects, only one
was about the social sciences or humanies (linguiscs),
and in SciStarter, of the 23 project classicaon categories,
only 2 were on AHSS (archaeology and educaon).
The review also suggests that the forms of parcipaon in
cizen science projects vary. A basic classicaon of par-
cipaon in projects can be divided into two levels: 1) non-
sciensts parcipate in the collecon and analysis stages;
and 2) non-sciensts contribute to true decision making
(Lewenstein, 2004). The BCNLab’s Cizen Science Oce
agrees with this author that any scienc research carried
out by non-professional sciensts can be considered cizen
science. However, in their Decalogue, they provide four le-
vels of classicaon of cizen science volunteers:
1. “Crowdsourcing”, cizens gather or process data;
2. “Distributed intelligence”, cizens interpret data;
3. “Parcipatory science”, cizens parcipate in the deni-
on of problems, challenges, objecves, and in the collec-
on of data; and
4. “Collaborave science”, cizens design, together with
sciensts, the research to be carried
out. This research must have a direct
impact on the immediate environ-
ment of the cizens and be able to
movate very specic acons in the
city (Cizen Science Oce, 2015).
The most common forms of parci-
paon in cizen science projects in
this study are at the basic level or,
as other authors have dened, of
the contributory type (Bonney et
al., 2009), with volunteers provi-
ding data and observaons for the
project. In these cases, individual
parcipaon is not explicit; it is pre-
sented jointly and it is necessary to
wait a while to see the results and
publicaons (Wechsler, 2014). As
seen in the research presented, the-
se projects aim to capture massive
quanes of data at a low cost, so
that professional sciensts can in-
vesgate and resolve research ques-
ons (Trumbull et al., 2000). The
design of these studies is done by
teams of researchers linked to cen-
tres of research or universies using
a top-down approach. It is this type of project design that
is beer posioned to receive and indeed receives more -
nancing from the EU.
Thus, while the projects are not usually on such an advan-
ced level as those of the BCNLab, or what other authors
have suggested are collaborave or co-creave ways of ci-
zen science, the literature on cizen science emphasizes
benets for volunteers that go beyond the mere producon
of important databases. Volunteers increase their knowled-
ge of the scienc process (Trumbull et al., 2000) and their
skills and personal development (learning, fun) are enhan-
ced. Moreover, the generaon of large quanes of data
is what makes science progress more rapidly (Franzoni;
Sauermann, 2014). In the case of arts, humanies and social
sciences, the eects have not yet been evaluated (Purdam,
2014).
Another line of research in the eld of cizen science is the
analysis of the quanty and quality of the research output
produced by these iniaves (Franzoni; Sauermann, 2014).
However, our case studies suggest that many of these inia-
ves in the area of social and human sciences are not aimed
at producing research publicaons but rather at dissemi-
nang the role of science, training or supporng scienc
iniaves in order to incorporate volunteers in the various
phases of the scienc process and not just in the collecon
http://www.socientize.eu
Benefits for volunteers go beyond the
mere production of databases: they in-
crease their knowledge of the scientific
process

Volunteer participation in citizen science projects
El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 835
of data. In fact, we have not been able to present the results
of the iniaves of these disciplines from the research done
on the plaorms for the disseminaon of cizen science
projects. A plausible hypothesis could be that these cizen
science projects in the elds of social sciences and humani-
es are not worried about the quanty of data or quanty
of volunteers that are involved.
What is clear is that cizen parcipaon in science is a mo-
vement that shows that the tradional dividing line between
the scienc and non-scienc is weak. However, the system
of research, understood as enes such as funding bodies
and elements of support to scienc processes, oen sees
cizens as mere contributors in the provision of data. In the
context of the public research support system in Spain (Preci-
pita plaorm), the volunteers do not appear to be taken into
account in any phase of the scienc process, and the task
they are invited to do is the nancing of the research.
6. Conclusions
A content analysis of four virtual plaorms for the dissemi-
naon of cizen science research projects shows that this
sort of project in the area of arts, humanies and social
sciences (AHSS) is almost non-existent. The rao of scien-
ce and engineering to social science and humanies is 99:1.
Therefore, in these disciplines there is huge potenal for
growth in terms of cizen science iniaves. Areas such as
audiovisual heritage or oral history are very likely to receive
volunteer parcipaon if cultural instuons promote this
form of involvement.
For the present study, cizen science project plaorms were
used and, as AHSS projects could not be found, they could
not be analyzed. Although proporonally there is a disnct
imbalance with other disciplines, projects of this kind do
exist. They are probably not published on these plaorms
because on many occasions they are not termed as cizen
science projects and do not consider themselves as “ca-
rrying out science”. However, in many cases, these projects
can be considered as research projects parally carried out
by non-professional sciensts. Therefore, in the second
stage of the research to be presented in this paper, we will
analyze the interviews carried out with ve AHSS iniaves
at the beginning of this year:
- “Fem memòria”, from the Biblioteca de Catalunya;
- “Transcriu-me”, from the Filmoteca de Catalunya;
- “Protops”, from the Tàpies Foundaon;
- ”Public Parcipaon GIS”, from the Cartographic Instute
of Catalonia; and
- “Tesmonis bibliotecaris”, from the Public Libraries Net-
work of Catalonia.
This new line of research will try to disnguish if these ci-
zen parcipaon projects can be recognized as cizen
science projects, furthering the benets organizaons and
volunteers receive from this kind of project and the bene-
ts for society and the generaon of new knowledge. Fur-
ther research will focus on how to generate cizen science
research projects in AHSS that can be categorized as levels
two to four from the Decalogue of BCNLab’s Cizen Science
Oce (2015). Cizens are acve in these levels of parcipa-
on in not only gathering and processing data, but also in
the design stages of the research process.
This acve parcipaon has not been found in the content
analysis of many of the natural and physical sciences pro-
jects, which are usually fostered with a top-down approach
and in which volunteers parcipate in the data collecon
phase in order to obtain a large volume of data.
Unl now, these projects, more related to Cizen’s obser-
vatories, have received more nancing from the European
Union. In this sort of project, informaon management
professionals are given a great opportunity to support the
virtual plaorms on which the data from volunteers are co-
llected in order to ensure their validity. However, there is
sll an absence of cizen science projects of a more par-
cipatory nature, and virtual environments that promote
communicaon in a structured manner could provide solu-
ons to helping volunteers contribute to the interpretaon
of data or the discussion to dene problems and challenges.
In this case, the majority of projects could be considered
collaborave.
http://issuu.com/bcnlabcienciaciudadana/docs/llibret_icub__v.eng_
In arts, humanities and social sciences
(AHSS) citizen science research projects
are almost non-existent

Núria Ferran-Ferrer
836 El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407
When cizen science research projects reach a parcipatory
level where volunteers are truly involved in the research,
only then will science come from cizens and not only from
universies and research centers, with knowledge being
created by the people, for the people.
Notes
1. Crowd science, cizen science, networked science or
massively-collaborave science are terms used to speak
about science with cizen involvement (Wiggins; Crowston
2011; cing Franzoni; Sauermann, 2014).
2. The term “crowdsourcing” was coined by Je Howe
(2006), and ranges from micro-sponsorship acons (from
Verkami, for instance) to collecve wisdom.
3. Spain. Law 14/2007, of 1 June, on Science, Technology
and Innovaon. Bolen ocial del Estado, 2 June 2011, n.
131, pp. 54387-54455.
Acknowledgements
Part of the project “Open access to scienc producon in
Spain: analysis of the level of implementaon and sustaina-
bility of a new model of scienc communicaon”, Naonal
R&D Plan (CSO2011-29503-C02-01/SOCI) and the Emer-
ging Research Group Laika (2014 SGR 1271). Thanks for the
comments received on the workshop organized by the Civic
Epistemologies project on 10 July 2015 in Budapest (EU FP7
grant agreement no. 632694).
Bibliography
Antelio, Marcio; Esteves, Maria-Gilda P.; Schneider, Daniel;
De Souza, Jano-Moreira (2012). “Qualitocracy: A data qual-
ity collaborave framework applied to cizen science”. 2012
IEEE Intl conf on systems, man, and cybernecs (SMC), pp.
931-936. ISBN: 9781467317139
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2012.6377847
Bermuda (1996). Report of the Internaonal strategy meet-
ing on human genome sequencing held at the Princess Ho-
tel, Southampton, Bermuda, on 25th-28th February 1996
(unpublished manuscript, February 1996). Obtained via
Freedom of Informaon Act (FOIA) request to the Naon-
al Human Genome Research Instute (NHGRI), FOIA Case
Number: 12-FOI-00224-NHGRI-39937
hp://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/handle/10161/7715
Bonney, Rick; Shirk, Jennifer L.; Phillips, Tina B.; Wiggins,
Andrea; Ballard, Heidi L.; Miller-Rushing, Abraham J.; Par-
rish, Julia K. (2014). “Next steps for cizen science”. Science,
v. 343, n. 6178, pp. 1436-1437.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1251554
Busch, Akiko (2013). The incidental steward: Reecons
on cizen science. New Haven: Yale Universty Press. ISBN:
9780300178791
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.10.016
Clark, Fiona; Illman, Deborah L. (2001). “Dimensions of civic
science: Introductory essay”. Science communicaon, v. 23,
n. 1, pp. 5-27.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1075547001023001002
Dawson, Diane (2012).”Open science and crowd science:
Selected sites and resources”. Issues in science and techno-
logy librarianship, Spring.
hp://scholar.uwindsor.ca/lripub/44
hp://dx.doi.org/10.5062/F48913SM
Declaración de Berlín sobre acceso abierto: texto de la ver-
sión autorizada al español, aprobada el 22 de octubre de
2003 por representantes de varias instuciones europeas
convocados por la Sociedad Max Planck
hp://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaraon
European Commission (2013). Guidelines on open access to
scienc publicaons and research data in Horizon 2020.
hp://ec.europa.eu/research/parcipants/data/ref/h2020/
grants_manual/hi/oa_pilot/h2020-hi-oa-pilot-guide_en.pdf
Franzoni, Chiara; Sauermann, Henry (2014). “Crowd scien-
ce: The organizaon of scienc research in open collabo-
rave projects” (August 14, 2013). Research policy, v. 43, n.
1, pp. 1-20.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2167538
Gómez-Ferri, Javier (2014). “Ciència ciutadana o ciutada-
nies cienques? Quatre models de parcipació en ciència
i tecnologia”. Internaonal journal of deliberave mecha-
nisms in science, v. 3, n. 1, pp. 24-48.
http://www.hipatiapress.info/hpjournals/index.php/
demesci/arcle/view/1197/998
hp://dx.doi.org/10.4471/demesci.2014.13
Howe, Je (2006). “The rise of crowdsourcing”. Wired, v. 14,
n. 6, pp. 134-145.
Hunter, Jane; Alabri, Abdulmonem; Van-Ingen, Catharine.
(2013). “Assessing the quality and trustworthiness of cizen
science data”, Concurrency and computaon: Pracce and
experience, v. 25, n. 4, pp. 454-466.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpe.2923
Lewenstein, Bruce (2004). “What does cizen science ac-
complish?”. Paper read at the CNRS Colloquium, June, Paris.
hp://hdl.handle.net/1813/37362
McLuhan, Marshall (1964). Understanding media: The ex-
tensions of man. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Museu de Ciències Naturals; Instució Catalana d’Història
Natural (2010). Conclusions de la Jornada “El valor dels
projectes de voluntariat en el coneixement i la gesó de la
biodiversitat”, Museu de Ciències Naturals, Barcelona, 13 de
maig de 2010.
hp://ichn.iec.cat/pdf/VolBiodiv_conclusions.pdf
Nielsen, Michael (2011). Reinvenng discovery: the new era
of networked science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University
Press. ISBN: 9781400839452
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9781400839452
Ocina de Ciència Ciutadana (2015). Ciència Ciutadana. 20
projectes per fer ciutat. Barcelona: Ajuntament de Barce-
lona. Instut de Cultura. B.12402-2015.
http://issuu.com/bcnlabcienciaciudadana/docs/llibret_
icub__v.cat_
Perelló, Josep (2014). “Cizen science: Knowledge takes
power”. En: CCCB LAB. Research and innovaon in the cul-

Volunteer participation in citizen science projects
El profesional de la información, 2015, noviembre-diciembre, v. 24, n. 6. eISSN: 1699-2407 837
tural sphere CCCB. 24-04-2014.
http://blogs.cccb.org/lab/en/article_ciencia-ciutadana-
coneixement-al-poder
Purdam, Kingsley (2014). “Cizen social science and cizen
data? Methodological and ethical challenges for social re-
search”. Current sociology, v. 62, n. 3, pp. 374-392.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011392114527997
Socienze Consorum (2013). Green paper on cizen science.
http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_
id=4121
Socienze Consorum (2014). White paper on cizen sci-
ence for Europe.
http://socientize.eu/?q=eu/content/download-socientize-
white-paper
Subirós, Olga; De-Vicente, José-Luís (com.) (2014). Big bang
data. Exposición celebrada en Barcelona, CCCB, 9 de mayo
- 16 de noviembre.
http://www.cccb.org/es/exposiciones/ficha/big-bang-
data/45167
Tomales Bay Instute (2006). The commons rising.
hp://bollier.org/sites/default/les/Commons_Rising_06.pdf
Trumbull, Deborah J.; Bonney, Rick; Bascom, Derek; Cabral,
Anna (2000). “Thinking sciencally during parcipaon in
a cizen-science project”. Science educaon, v. 84, n. 2, pp.
265-275.
Wechsler, Dietmar (2014). “Crowdsourcing as a method of
transdisciplinary research - Tapping the full potenal of par-
cipants”. Futures, v. 60, pp. 14-22.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.02.005
Wiggins, Andrea; Crowston, Kevin (2012). “Goals and
tasks: Two typologies of cizen science projects”. Forty-
h Hawai’s intl conf on system science (HICSS-45). ISBN:
9781457719257
hp://crowston.syr.edu/sites/crowston.syr.edu/les/hicss-
45-nal.pdf
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.295
Zhao, Yuxiang; Zhu, Qinghua (2014). “Evaluaon on crowd-
sourcing research: Current status and future direcon”. Inf
syst front, v. 16, n. 3, pp. 417-434.
hp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10796-012-9350-4
6ª Conferencia internacional sobre calidad de
revistas de ciencias sociales y humanidades
CRECS 2016
5-6 de mayo
Universidad de Barcelona
(edificio central, plaza de la Universidad)
C
R
E
C
S
2
0
1
6