Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > How reliable are citizen‐derived scientific data?
View graph of relations

How reliable are citizen‐derived scientific data?: assessing the quality of contrail observations made by the general public

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

How reliable are citizen‐derived scientific data? assessing the quality of contrail observations made by the general public. / Fowler, Amy; Whyatt, Duncan; Davies, Gemma et al.
In: Transactions in GIS, Vol. 17, No. 4, 08.2013, p. 488-506.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{5cdf283a64da4383bf2d306ed32b2624,
title = "How reliable are citizen‐derived scientific data?: assessing the quality of contrail observations made by the general public",
abstract = "Citizen science projects encourage the general public to participate in scientific research. Participants can contribute large volumes of data over broad spatial and temporal frames; however the challenge is to generate data of sufficient quality to be useable in scientific research. Most observations made by citizen‐scientists can be independently verified by {\textquoteleft}experts{\textquoteright}. However, verification is more problematic when the phenomena being recorded are short‐lived. This paper uses a GIS methodology to verify the quality of contrail observations made by the general public as part of the OPAL Climate Survey. We verify observations using datasets derived from a variety of different sources (experts, models and amateur enthusiasts) with different spatial and temporal properties which reflect the complex 3D nature of the atmosphere. Our results suggest that ~70% of citizen observations are plausible based on favourable atmospheric conditions and the presence or absence of aircraft; a finding which is in keeping with other, more conventional citizen science projects. However, questions remain as to why the quality of the citizen‐based observations was so high. Given the lack of supporting data on observers, it is impossible to determine whether the dataset was generated by the activities of many participants or a small but dedicated number of individual observers.",
keywords = "Contrails, Ephemeral Data, spatio-temporal analysis, Data quality, Verification",
author = "Amy Fowler and Duncan Whyatt and Gemma Davies and Rebecca Ellis",
year = "2013",
month = aug,
doi = "10.1111/tgis.12034",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "488--506",
journal = "Transactions in GIS",
issn = "1361-1682",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "4",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - How reliable are citizen‐derived scientific data?

T2 - assessing the quality of contrail observations made by the general public

AU - Fowler, Amy

AU - Whyatt, Duncan

AU - Davies, Gemma

AU - Ellis, Rebecca

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - Citizen science projects encourage the general public to participate in scientific research. Participants can contribute large volumes of data over broad spatial and temporal frames; however the challenge is to generate data of sufficient quality to be useable in scientific research. Most observations made by citizen‐scientists can be independently verified by ‘experts’. However, verification is more problematic when the phenomena being recorded are short‐lived. This paper uses a GIS methodology to verify the quality of contrail observations made by the general public as part of the OPAL Climate Survey. We verify observations using datasets derived from a variety of different sources (experts, models and amateur enthusiasts) with different spatial and temporal properties which reflect the complex 3D nature of the atmosphere. Our results suggest that ~70% of citizen observations are plausible based on favourable atmospheric conditions and the presence or absence of aircraft; a finding which is in keeping with other, more conventional citizen science projects. However, questions remain as to why the quality of the citizen‐based observations was so high. Given the lack of supporting data on observers, it is impossible to determine whether the dataset was generated by the activities of many participants or a small but dedicated number of individual observers.

AB - Citizen science projects encourage the general public to participate in scientific research. Participants can contribute large volumes of data over broad spatial and temporal frames; however the challenge is to generate data of sufficient quality to be useable in scientific research. Most observations made by citizen‐scientists can be independently verified by ‘experts’. However, verification is more problematic when the phenomena being recorded are short‐lived. This paper uses a GIS methodology to verify the quality of contrail observations made by the general public as part of the OPAL Climate Survey. We verify observations using datasets derived from a variety of different sources (experts, models and amateur enthusiasts) with different spatial and temporal properties which reflect the complex 3D nature of the atmosphere. Our results suggest that ~70% of citizen observations are plausible based on favourable atmospheric conditions and the presence or absence of aircraft; a finding which is in keeping with other, more conventional citizen science projects. However, questions remain as to why the quality of the citizen‐based observations was so high. Given the lack of supporting data on observers, it is impossible to determine whether the dataset was generated by the activities of many participants or a small but dedicated number of individual observers.

KW - Contrails

KW - Ephemeral Data

KW - spatio-temporal analysis

KW - Data quality

KW - Verification

U2 - 10.1111/tgis.12034

DO - 10.1111/tgis.12034

M3 - Journal article

VL - 17

SP - 488

EP - 506

JO - Transactions in GIS

JF - Transactions in GIS

SN - 1361-1682

IS - 4

ER -