Collective Intelligence in Citizen Science -- A Study of Performers and Talkers

Authors: Ramine Tinati, Elena Simperl, Markus Luczak-Roesch, Max Van Kleek, Nigel Shadbolt

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 1406.7551v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
The summary is not ready yet

Abstract: The recent emergence of online citizen science is illustrative of an efficient and effective means to harness the crowd in order to achieve a range of scientific discoveries. Fundamentally, citizen science projects draw upon crowds of non-expert volunteers to complete short Tasks, which can vary in domain and complexity. However, unlike most human-computational systems, participants in these systems, the `citizen scientists' are volunteers, whereby no incentives, financial or otherwise, are offered. Furthermore, encouraged by citizen science platforms such as Zooniverse, online communities have emerged, providing them with an environment to discuss, share ideas, and solve problems. In fact, it is the result of these forums that has enabled a number of scientific discoveries to be made. In this paper we explore the phenomenon of collective intelligence via the relationship between the activities of online citizen science communities and the discovery of scientific knowledge. We perform a cross-project analysis of ten Zooniverse citizen science projects and analyse the behaviour of users with regards to their Task completion activity and participation in discussion and discover collective behaviour amongst highly active users. Whilst our findings have implications for future citizen science design, we also consider the wider implications for understanding collective intelligence research in general.

Submitted to arXiv on 29 Jun. 2014

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

⚠The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

⚠The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.