21
Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen science projects Dana Rotman, Jennifer Preece, Jennifer Hammock, Kezee Procita, Derek Hansen, Cynthia Parr, Darcy Lewis, David Jacobs CSCW ‘12, February 13, 2012, Seattle WA

Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen science projects

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Online citizen science projects engage volunteers in collecting, analyzing, and curating scientific data. Existing projects have demonstrated the value of using volunteers to collect data, but few projects have reached the full collaborative potential of scientists and volunteers. Understanding the shared and unique motivations of these two groups can help designers establish the technical and social infrastructures needed to promote effective partnerships. We present findings from a study of the motivational factors affecting participation in ecological citizen science projects. We show that volunteers are motivated by a complex framework of factors that dynamically change throughout their cycle of work on scientific projects; this motivational framework is strongly affected by personal interests as well as external factors such as attribution and acknowledgment. Identifying the pivotal points of motivational shift and addressing them in the design of citizen-science systems will facilitate improved collaboration between scientists and volunteers.

Citation preview

Dynamic changes in motivation in collaborative citizen science projects

Dana Rotman, Jennifer Preece, Jennifer Hammock, Kezee Procita, Derek Hansen, Cynthia Parr, Darcy Lewis, David Jacobs

CSCW ‘12, February 13, 2012, Seattle WA

Crowdsourcing is needed to accomplish scientific work

Research Questions

What are the major motivational factors affecting volunteers and scientists’ engagement in citizen science projects?

1

What are the major motivational barriers to such collaboration?

2

Methods

Participants

Scientists n = 62 (44%)

Volunteers n = 80 (56%)

Experience

Less than a year ScientistsVolunteers

n = 16n = 35

(25%)(44%)

More than a year ScientistsVolunteers

n = 46n = 45

(75%)(56%)

Gender

MaleScientistsVolunteers

n = 38 n = 46

(60%)(57%)

FemaleScientistsVolunteers

n = 24n = 34

(40%)(43%)

N = 142

Magnusfrankkun @ Flickr

Survey

18 interviewsScientists (44%)

Volunteers (56%)

Most participants had more than 1 year of

experience

Principles of social participation

Buckeye98 @Flickr

Liam Q @ FlickrXXTeresaXX@Flickr

Egoism

PrincipalismCollectivism

Altruism

Batson, Ahmed and Chang, 2002

yarotman

Motivations for collaboration

Motivations for collaboration - scientists

Education and outreach

“I don’t think people can make good decisions, be it policy or environmental or anything else, unless they understand how things work. This provides the opportunity to educate people through a valid citizen science program”

Data needs

“I see [volunteers] as most helpful in making accurate observations… they are basically the field component”

Motivations for collaboration - volunteers

Primary motivation - personal interest

“I think personal interest comes first. Personal interest and personal gain”.

“I would be less inclined to participate in something I had little interest in, even if it was a worthy endeavor”

Motivations for collaboration - volunteers

Secondary motivations - recognition and attribution

“I’m not really, obviously, objected to glory. I do expect attribution… I would always like to be the first one to put a photo up there, it’s got to count somehow” “It’s not about spending time or money. It’s more about the constant feedback to the volunteers that what we’re doing is useful and being used”

“people going through the thorough training feel like they’re contributing a lot more”

Motivations for collaboration - volunteers

Feedback

“It’s the combination of being an affective citizen scientist and seeing the community thrive… people really care about their natural resources here”

“It’s a perfect opportunity to help people understand their environment. I hope that something that you say will make a dent and make them more curious and they’ll go home and pick a book or they’ll call you back”

Secondary motivations - community involvement and advocacy

De-motivating factors

“Scientists are intimidating”“Scientists speak a different jargon”“they are just so unfriendly!”

Volunteers Scientists

“they may potentially contaminate the data”“we need quality control!”

“people won’t come back if there isn’t a loop of credibility and trust and things that they can see that are being accomplished as a result of the data they are collecting”

Without scientists’

recognition = loss of

motivation

Personal interest

initial or ongoing

Initial involvement Interaction with

scientists

RecognitionTraining, attribution,

feedback

Continued involvement

Ongoing attribution, inclusion in scientific work, community involvement ,

advocacy

egoism

egoismEgoism,

collectivism, altruism

Without scientists’ continued

recognition = loss of

motivation

Scientists’ need for data

Scientists’ altruistic support

for public education

Process model of scientists’ and volunteers’ collaboration

Designing for continuous collaboration

Timing is everything

toniVC @ Flickr

Designing for continuous collaboration

Highlighting data use and reuse

http://www.divematrix.com/showthread.php?9520-hehehehe-Hermit-Crab-movin-on-up!

Designing for continuous collaboration

Emphasize locality

toniVC @ Flickr

Yarotman

Designing for continuous collaboration

Break tasks into smaller building blocks; support synergy

Ksgr @ Flickr

Designing for continuous collaboration

Match scientists, volunteers and tasks

muhawi001@ Flickr

Jessi.bryan @ Flickr

Future work

Examine the process model across cultures and disciplines

1

2 Facilitate better ways to get volunteers to come back and continuously engage in citizen science collaborations

danarotman

[email protected]

Supported by NSF SoCS grant # 0968546

Questions?Questions?