Who generates better data: group members, or individual participants?

The primary goal of many citizen science programs is to collect data of sufficient quality and quantity to support scientific research. As such, it is critical to understand the most effective means of engaging volunteers. ... [ view full abstract ]

The primary goal of many citizen science programs is to collect data of sufficient quality and quantity to support scientific research. As such, it is critical to understand the most effective means of engaging volunteers. Using six years of data from a national-scale biodiversity monitoring program, we compared the efficacy of two ongoing models of participation -- Independent Participation and Local Project Participation – on several metrics: number of volunteers engaged, data quantity per participant, within-season activity level, and long-term participant retention.
The USA National Phenology Network (USA-NPN) fosters two models for engaging observers in the citizen science program, Nature’s Notebook. The standard model is Independent Participation (IP), wherein individuals learn about and participate in Nature’s Notebook independent of any other group. An alternative model, Local Project Participation (LPP), represents a rapidly growing segment of Nature’s Notebook wherein observers participate as part of a locally or regionally organized group. Organizations including nature centers, arboreta, colleges, Master Gardener chapters, and land trusts have established such local phenology projects. All IP and LPP participants receive regular support and communication from USA-NPN staff. LPP participants typically receive additional communication and support from their local project coordinator.
The LPP model results in more observations per participant and greater retention into the second year than the IP model. However, the IP model yields more participants overall; within-season activity level does not differ between the two models. We hypothesize that the LPP model boasts higher numbers for some metrics because it involves more face-to-face interaction and is more locally relevant to participants. However, the IP model also represents a good opportunity to grow our data resource. Results from this formative assessment will be used to allocate resources for Nature’s Notebook, and could be considered by other citizen science programs operating primarily via the internet.