This research looks at some of the different methods of validation used in the growing phenomenon citizen science. Citizen science is discussed and a small range of different typologies is used to define it. To find some of the common themes of validation six case studies are performed. The case studies examine the following six citizen science projects: GLOBE at Night, eBird, Citclops, Foldit, Galaxy Zoo and EyeWire. These projects a divided equally in to two types based on previous typological research: data collection projects and analysis projects. All projects are international in scope but differ greatly in actions and so in what type of validation they use. It is showed that some validation is made in comparison to data made by professionals or machine data or some other external source. In two cases the results of the project are self-validating and one case validation is made by experts on data that seems out of the ordinary. A few projects use consensus data i.e. the average of observations or analyses made by the citizen scientists either for validation or as a measure of probable correctness. A short discussion of the results and some suggestions of future research finishes of this research.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-130683 |
| Date | January 2015 |
| Creators | Ruotsalainen, Marcus |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Sociologiska institutionen |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0025 seconds