The interaction of professional and citizen science: issues of power and communication

About the authors:

Elena N. Rassolova, Junior Researcher, Sociological Institute of RAS a branch of the Federal Sociological Center of the Russian Academy of Science, Saint-Petersburg, Russia; enrassolova@gmail.com, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3637-5544

Konstantin A. Galkin, Cand. Sc. (Sociology), Senior Researcher, Sociological Institute of RAS — branch of the Federal Sociological Center of the Russian Academy of Science, St. Petersburg, Russia; kgalkin1989@mail.ru, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6403-6083

Abstract:

The article examines the specifics of the development of communication between professional researchers and amateur scientists, as well as successful projects in the field of citizen science, where such communication has successfully developed. The study has analyzed scientific publications (a total of 500) by Russian and authors from other countries on overcoming monopoly in professional science, communication, and interactions between citizen and professional science, and publications on the distribution of power in professional science. The method of analysis is low-quality content analysis. The purpose of the study is to consider the features of interaction between professional and citizen science and analyze the most successful examples of cooperation. Based on the analysis of publications, three types of strategies were identified that characterize the specifics of the interaction of professional science with citizen science and the features of the interactions of professional scientists with amateurs were determined. Each of the strategies has its own specifics of communication and organization of the scientific community, and is also characterized by a certain degree of оpenness/closeness. The study also analyzes successful communication development projects in professional and civic science.

References:

Arnold, V. (1989). Gyujgens i Barrou, N'yuton i Guk. Pervye shagi matematicheskogo analiza i teorii katastrof, ot evol'vent do kvazikristallov [Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke. The First Steps of Mathematical Analysis and Catastrophe Theory, from Involutes to Quasicrystals]. Nauka. [In Russian]

Vasilik, M. A. (2004). Nauka o kommunikacii ili teoriya kommunikacii? K probleme teoreticheskoj identifikacii [Communication science or communication theory? On the problem of theoretical identification]. In Aktual'nye problem teorii kommunikacii: sb. nauch. tr. [Current Problems in Communication Theory] (pp. 4–11). SPbGPU. [In Russian].

Egerev, S. V. (2016). Ot kraudsorsingaprostyhoperacij k “naukegrazhdan” [From Crowdsourcing of Simple Operations to “Science of Citizens”]. Sociologiya nauki i tekhnologij [Sociology of Science and Technology], 7(4), 74–85. [In Russian].

Izaak, S.I. (2018). Rol' nauchnyh kommunikacij v nauchno-tekhnologicheskom razvitii Rossii [The role of scientific communications in the scientific and technological development of Russia]. Nauchnye issledovaniya i razrabotki. Sovremennaya kommunikativistika [Scientific Research and development. Modern Communication Science], 7(1), 8–11. [In Russian].

Kalinina, G. N., Rimskaya, O. N. (2015). Kommunikativnaya nauka kak “Al'ternativnaya”: filosofsko-metodologicheskaya eksplikaciya [Communication Science as “Alternative”: Philosophical and Methodological Explication]. NOMOTHETIKA: Filosofiya. Sociologiya. Pravo [NOMOTHETIKA: Philosophy. Sociology. Law], 33(14), 21–27. [In Russian].

Ogurtsov, A. P. (2006). Postmodernizm v kontekste novyh vyzovov nauki i obrazovaniya [Postmodernism in the context of new challenges of science and education]. Vestnik Samarskoj gumanitarnoj akademii. Vypusk “Filosofiya. Filologiya” [Bulletin of the Samara Humanitarian Academy. Issue “Philosophy. Philology”], (1), 4. [In Russian].

Orekhovsky, P. A., & Razumov, V. I. (2020). Vremya karnavala: rossijskaya vysshaya shkola i nauka v epohu postmoderna [Carnival time: Russian higher school and science in the postmodern era]. Idei i idealy [Ideas and Ideals], 12(3-1), 77–94. [In Russian].

Sachuk, S. N. (2017). Perspektivy razvitiya otkrytyh innovacij v upravlenii proektami [Prospects for the development of open innovation in project management]. Interaktivnaya nauka [Interactive Science], (11), 200–202. https://doi.org/10.21661/r-116639 [In Russian].

Khagurov, T. A. (2011). Krizis moderna i obrazovanie [The crisis of modernity and education]. Rossiya reformiruyushchayasya [Reforming Russia], (10), 221–242. [In Russian].

Shkorubskaya, E. G. (2019). Genezis nauchnoj stat'I kak formy kommunikacii uchenyh [Genesis of a scientific article as a form of communication between scientists]. Sociologiya nauki i tekhnologij [Sociology of Science and Technology], 10(2), 56–74. [In Russian].

Akhter, N., Ali, M. S., Siddique, M., & Akram, M. S. (2021). The role and importance of communicating science for building up understanding of science applications. Multicultural Education, 7(10), 274–281.

Becken, S., Connolly, R. M., Chen, J., & Stantic, B. (2019). A hybrid is born: Integrating collective sensing, citizen science and professional monitoring of the environment. Ecological Informatics, 52, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2019.05.001

Bekh, V., Yaroshenko, A., Zhyzhko, T., Ignatyev, V., & Dodonov, R. (2020). Postmodern picture of reality of scientific knowledge: evolution by epistemological diversity. Postmodern Openings, 11(3), 207–219. https://doi.org/10.18662/po/11.3/208

Bereiter C., Scardamalia, M., Cassells, C., Hewitt, J. (1997). Postmodernism, knowledge building, and elementary science. The Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 329–340. https://doi.org/10.1086/461869

Bonney R., Cooper, C. B., Dickinson, J., Kelling, S., Phillips, T., Rosenberg, K. V., Shirk, J. (2009). Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience, 59(11), 977–984. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2009.59.11.9

Brown E. D., Williams B. K. (2019). The potential for citizen science to produce reliable and useful information in ecology. Conservation Biology, 33(3), 561–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13223

Bucchi M. (1996). When scientists turn to the public: alternative routes in science communication. Public Understanding of Science, 5(4), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/5/4/005

Buytaert W., Dewulf, A., De Bièvre, B., Clark, J., & Hannah, D. M. (2016). Citizen science for water resources management: toward polycentric monitoring and governance? Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 142(4), 181–202. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000641

Cohn, J. P. (2008). Citizen science: can volunteers do real research? BioScience, 58(3), 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1641/B580303

de Vries, M., Land-Zandstra, A., & Smeets, I. (2019). Citizen scientists’ preferences for communication of scientific output: a literature review. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.136

Dowthwaite, L., & Sprinks, J. (2019). Citizen science and the professional-amateur divide: lessons from differing online practices. Journal of Science Communication, 18(01), Article 06. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.18010206

Eleta I., Clavell, G. G., Righi, V., & Balestrini, M. (2019). The promise of participation and decision-making power in citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.171

Fan, F., & Chen, S. L. (2019). Citizen, science, and citizen science. East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal, 13(2), 181–193. https://doi.org/10.1215/18752160-7542643

Franzen, M. (2019). Changing science–society relations in the digital age: the citizen science movement and its broader implications. In D. Simon, S. Kuhlmann, J. Stamm & W. Canzler (Eds.), Handbook on Science and Public Policy (pp. 336—356). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784715946.00028

Grant, I. H. (2012). Postmodernism and science and technology. In S. Sim (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Postmodernism (pp. 94–107). Routledge.

Hecker, S., Haklay, M., Bowser, A., Makuch, Z., Vogel, J., & Bonn, A. (2018). Innovation in open science, society and policy–setting the agenda for citizen science. In S. Hecker, M. Haklay, A. Bowser, Z. Makuch, J. Vogel, A. Bonn (Eds.), Citizen Science: Innovation in Open Science, Society and Policy (Pp. 1–24). UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv550cf2.8

Heise, U. K. (2004). Science, technology, and postmodernism. In S. Connor (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Postmodernism (pp. 136–167). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL0521640520.008

Irwin, A. (1995). Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise, and Sustainable Development. Routledge.

Liu, H. Y., Dörler, D., Heigl, F., & Grossberndt, S. (2021). Citizen science platforms. Citizen Science Platforms. In K. Vohland et al. (Eds.), The Science of Citizen Science (pр. 439–459). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_22

Moshfeghi, Y., Huertas-Rosero, A. F., & Jose, J. M. (2016). Identifying careless workers in crowdsourcing platforms: a game theory approach. Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (pp. 857–860). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2911451.2914756

Newman, G., Wiggins, A., Crall, A., Graham, E., Newman, S., Crowston K. (2012). The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 10(6), 298–304. https://doi.org/10.1890/110294

Pelacho M., Ruiz, G., Sanz, F., Tarancón, A., & Clemente-Gallardo, J. (2021). Analysis of the evolution and collaboration networks of citizen science scientific publications. Scientometrics, 126, 225–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03724-x

Rüfenacht, S., Woods, T., Agnello, G., Gold, M., Hummer, P., Land-Zandstra, A., & Sieber, A. (2021). Communication and dissemination in citizen science. In K. Vohland et al. (Eds.), The Science of Citizen Science (pp. 475–494). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_24

Sbrocchi, C., Pecl, G., van Putten, I., & Roetman, P. (2022). A citizen science community of practice: relational patterns contributing to shared practice. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 7(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.358

Shortt, S. E. D. (1983). Physicians, science, and status: issues in the professionalization of Anglo-American medicine in the nineteenth century. Medical History, 27(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025727300042265

Skarlatidou, A., & Haklay, M. (2021). Citizen science impact pathways for a positive contribution to public participation in science. Journal of Science Communication, 20(06), Article 02. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20060202

Stehr, N. (1991). The power of scientific knowledge‐and its limits. Canadian Review of Sociology. Revue canadienne de sociologie, 28(4), 460–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-618X.1991.tb00165.x

Strasser, B. J., Baudry, J., Mahr, D., Sanchez, G., & Tancoigne, E. (2019). “Citizen Science”? Rethinking Science and Public Participation. Science & Technology Studies, 32(2), 52–76. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.60425

Zhang, X., Yang, Z., Zhou, Z., Cai, H., Chen, L., Li, X. (2014). Free market of crowdsourcing: Incentive mechanism design for mobile sensing. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 25(12), 3190–3200. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPDS.2013.2297112