Citizen Science: A Tool for Integrating Studies of Human and Natural Systems

Literature Cited

1. Miller-Rushing A, Primack R, Bonney RE. 1.  2012. The history of public participation in ecological research. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6285–90 [Google Scholar]
2. Cooper CB. 2.  2012. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of data. Sci. Am. Guest Blog July 3. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/07/03/life-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-data/
3. Cooper CB. 3.  2012. Retro science, part 1. Sci. Am. Guest Blog Aug. 23. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/08/23/retro-science-part-1/ [Google Scholar]
4. Cooper CB. 4.  2012. Victorian-era citizen science: reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated. Sci. Am. Guest Blog Aug. 30. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/08/30/victorian-era-citizen-science-reports-of-its-death-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/ [Google Scholar]
5. Greenwood JJD. 5.  2007. Citizens, science and bird conservation. J. Ornithol. 148:177–124 [Google Scholar]
6. Dickinson JL, Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN. 6.  2010. Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 41:1149–72 [Google Scholar]
7. Dickinson JL, Shirk J, Bonter D, Bonney RE, Crain RL. 7.  et al. 2012. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Frontiers 10:1–30 [Google Scholar]
8. Wiggins A, Crowston K. 8.  2011. From conservation to crowdsourcing: a typology of citizen science. Int. J. Organ. Des. Eng. 1:1/2148–58 [Google Scholar]
9. Cohn JP. 9.  2011. Citizen science: can volunteers do real research?. BioScience 58:3192–97 [Google Scholar]
10. Kremen C, Ullman KS, Thorp RW. 10.  2011. Evaluating the quality of citizen-scientist data on pollinator communities. Conserv. Biol. 25:3607–17 [Google Scholar]
11. Lehr JL. 11.  2006. Social justice pedagogies and scientific knowledge: remaking citizenship in the non-science classroom PhD Thesis, Va. Polytech. Inst. State Univ., Blacksburg
12. Kelling S, Hochachka WM, Fink D, Riedewald M, Caruana R. 12.  et al. 2011. Data-intensive science: a new paradigm for biodiversity studies. BioScience 59:7613–20 [Google Scholar]
13. Catlin-Groves CL. 13.  2012. The citizen science landscape: from volunteers to citizen sensors and beyond. Int. J. Zool. 2012:21–14 [Google Scholar]
14. Shirk JL, Ballard HL, Wilderman CC, Phillips T, Wiggins A. 14.  et al. 2012. Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecol. Soc. 17:229 [Google Scholar]
15. Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C. 15.  et al. 2007. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317:58441513–16 [Google Scholar]
16. Chapin FS III, Power ME, Pickett STA, Freitag A, Reynolds JA. 16.  et al. 2011. Earth stewardship: science for action to sustain the human-Earth system. Ecosphere 2:889 [Google Scholar]
17. Pretty J. 17.  2011. Interdisciplinary progress in approaches to address social-ecological and ecocultural systems. Environ. Conserv. 38:2127–39 [Google Scholar]
18. Collins SL. 18.  2011. An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social-ecological research. Front. Ecol. Environ. 9:6351–57 [Google Scholar]
19. Roy ED. 19.  2013. The elusive pursuit of interdisciplinarity at the human-environment interface. BioScience 63:9745–53 [Google Scholar]
20. Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R. 20.  2007. Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecol. Soc. 12:211 [Google Scholar]
21. Dickinson JL, Crain RL, Reeve HK, Schuldt JP. 21.  2013. Can evolutionary design of social networks make it easier to be ‘green’?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28:9561–69 [Google Scholar]
22. Nov O, Arazy O, Anderson D. 22.  2011. Technology-mediated citizen science participation: a motivational model. Proc. AAAI Int. Conf. Weblogs Soc. Media, 5th, Barcelona, Spain, July. Palo Alto, CA: Assoc. Adv. Artif. Intell. [Google Scholar]
23. Newman G, Wiggins A, Crall A, Graham EA, Newman S, Crowston K. 23.  2012. The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6298–304 [Google Scholar]
24. Wiggins A. 24.  2011. eBirding: technology adoption and the transformation of leisure into science. Proc. 2011 iConf., Seattle, Feb. 8–11798–99 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
25. Prestopnik NR, Crowston K. 25.  2011. Gaming for (citizen) science: exploring motivation and data quality in the context of crowdsourced science through the design and evaluation of a social-computational system. Presented at Comput. Citiz. Sci. Workshop IEEE eSci. Conf., Stockholm, Swed.
26. See L, Comber A, Salk C, Fritz S, van der Velde M. 26.  et al. 2013. Comparing the quality of crowdsourced data contributed by expert and non-experts. PLOS ONE 8:7e69958 [Google Scholar]
27. Bowser A, Shanley L. 27.  2013. New visions in citizen science Case Study Ser. 3, Woodrow Wilson Int. Cent. Sch., Washington, DC. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/NewVisionsInCitizenScience.pdf
28. Eveleigh A, Jennett C, Blandford A, Brohan P, Cox AL. 28.  et al. 2014. Designing for dabblers and deterring drop-outs in citizen science. CHI '14 Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comp. Systems, Toronto, Ont., Apr. 26–May 12985–94 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
29. Fink D, Damoulas T, Dave J. 29.  2013. Adaptive spatio-temporal exploratory models: hemisphere-wide species distributions from massively crowdsourced eBird data Presented at 27th AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell., Bellevue, WA
30. Fink D, Hochachka WM, Zuckerberg B, Winkler DW, Shaby B. 30.  et al. 2010. Spatiotemporal exploratory models for broad-scale survey data. Front. Ecol. Environ. 20:82131–47 [Google Scholar]
31. Hurlbert AH, Liang Z. 31.  2012. Spatiotemporal variation in avian migration phenology: citizen science reveals effects of climate change. PLOS ONE 7:2e31662 [Google Scholar]
32. Schwartz MD, Betancourt JL, Weltzin JF. 32.  2012. From Caprio's lilacs to the USA National Phenology Network. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6324–27 [Google Scholar]
33. Devictor V, Whittaker RJ, Beltrame C. 33.  2010. Beyond scarcity: citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography. Divers. Distrib. 16:3354–62 [Google Scholar]
34. Hulcr J, Latimer AM, Henley JB, Rountree NR, Fierer N. 34.  et al. 2012. A jungle in there: Bacteria in belly buttons are highly diverse, but predictable. PLOS ONE 7:11e47712 [ Erratum] [Google Scholar]
35. Haywood BK. 35.  2013. A “sense of place” in public participation in scientific research. Sci. Educ. 98:164–83 [Google Scholar]
36. McCormick S. 36.  2012. After the cap: risk assessment, citizen science and disaster recovery. Ecol. Soc. 17:431 [Google Scholar]
37. Bartel RA, Oberhauser KS, de Roode JC, Altizer SM. 37.  2011. Monarch butterfly migration and parasite transmission in eastern North America. Front. Ecol. Environ. 92:2342–51 [Google Scholar]
38. Dunn RR, Fierer N, Henley JB, Leff JW, Menninger HL. 38.  2013. Home life: factors structuring the bacterial diversity found within and between homes. PLOS ONE 8:5e64133 [Google Scholar]
39. Gonsamo A, Chen JM, Wu C. 39.  2013. Citizen science: linking the recent rapid advances of plant flowering in Canada with climate variability. Sci. Rep. 3:2239 http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130719/srep02239/full/srep02239.html [Google Scholar]
40. Bodilis P, Louisy P, Draman M, Arceo HO, Francour P. 40.  2013. Can citizen science survey non-indigenous fish species in the eastern Mediterranean Sea?. Environ. Manag. 53:1172–80 [Google Scholar]
41. Silvertown J, Cook L, Cameron R, Dodd M, McConway K. 41.  et al. 2011. Citizen science reveals unexpected continental-scale evolutionary change in a model organism. PLOS ONE 6:4e18927 [Google Scholar]
42. Fothergill K, Moore W, Losey J, Allee LL. 42.  2010. First Arizona records of the multicolored Asian lady beetle, Harmonia axyridis (Pallas) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Coleopt Bull. 64:151–52 [Google Scholar]
43. Bailey RL, Clark GE. 43.  2014. Occurrence of twin embryos in the eastern bluebird. Peer J. 2:e273 [Google Scholar]
44. Scheinin AP, Kerem D, MacLeod CD, Gazo M, Chicote CA, Castellote M. 44.  2011. Gray whale (Eschrichtius robustus) in the Mediterranean Sea: anomalous event or early sign of climate-driven distribution change?. Mar. Biodivers. Rec. 4:e28 [Google Scholar]
45. Osbaldiston R, Schott JP. 45.  2012. Environmental sustainability and behavioral science: meta-analysis of proenvironmental behavior experiments. Environ. Behav. 44:2257–99 [Google Scholar]
46. Jordan RC, Ballard HL, Philips TB. 46.  2012. Key issues and new approaches for evaluating citizen-science learning outcomes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6307–9 [Google Scholar]
47. Bonney RE, Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Kelling S, Phillips T. 47.  et al. 2009. Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience 59:11977–84 [Google Scholar]
48. Tulloch AIT, Szabo JK. 48.  2012. A behavioural ecology approach to understand volunteer surveying for citizen science datasets. EMU Austral Ornithol. 112:4313–25 [Google Scholar]
49. Tulloch AIT, Possingham HP, Joseph LN, Szabo JK, Martin TG. 49.  2013. Realising the full potential of citizen science monitoring programs. Biol. Conserv. 165:128–38 [Google Scholar]
50. Bell P, Lewenstein BV, Shouse AW, Feder MA. 50.  2009. Learning Science in Informal Environments Washington, DC: Natl. Acad.
51. Haklay M. 51.  2013. Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: overview and typology of participation. Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge D Sui, S Elwood, M Goodchild 105–22 Berlin: Springer [Google Scholar]
52. Tweddle JC, Robinson LD, Pocock MJ, Roy HE. 52.  2012. Guide to Citizen Science: Developing, Implementing and Evaluating Citizen Science to Study Biodiversity and the Environment in the UK Swindon, UK: Nat. Hist. Mus., Nat. Environ. Res. Counc., Cent. Ecol. Hydrol., UK-Environ. Obs. Framew.
53. Roy HE, Pocock MJO, Preston CD, Roy DB, Savage J. 53.  et al. 2012. Understanding citizen science and environmental monitoring Rep. on behalf of UK-Environ. Obs. Framew., Nat. Environ. Res. Counc., Cent. Ecol. Hydrol., Nat. Hist. Mus.
54. Dickinson JL, Crain RL, Yalowitz S, Cherry TM. 54.  2013. How framing climate change influences citizen scientists' intentions to do something about it. J. Environ. Educ. 44:3145–58 [Google Scholar]
55. Cooper CB. 55.  2012. Links and distinctions among citizenship, science, and citizen science: a response to “The future of citizen science.”. Democr. Educ. 20:213 [Google Scholar]
56. Mueller MP, Tippins D, Bryan LA. 56.  2012. The future of citizen science. Democr. Educ. 20:12 [Google Scholar]
57. Freitag A, Pfeffer MJ. 57.  2013. Process, not product: investigating recommendations for improving citizen science “success.”. PLOS ONE 8:5e64079 [Google Scholar]
58. Wells NM, Lekies KS. 58.  2012. Children and nature: following the trail to environmental attitudes and behavior. See Ref. 100 201–13
59. Jordan RC, Gray SA, Howe DV, Brooks WR, Ehrenfeld JG. 59.  2011. Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conserv. Biol. 25:61148–54A strong publication attempting to collect empirical data about both behavioral and knowledge change as a result of citizen-science participation. [Google Scholar]
60. Price CA, Lee H-S. 60.  2013. Changes in participants' scientific attitudes and epistemological beliefs during an astronomical citizen science project. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 50:7773–801One of the first publications to capture some measurable social effects in citizen-science participation. [Google Scholar]
61. Phillips TB, Ferguson M, Minarchek M, Porticella N, Bonney R. 61.  2014. User's Guide for Evaluating Learning Outcomes in Citizen Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab Ornithol.
62. Mason W, Suri S. 62.  2011. Conducting behavioral research on Amazon's Mechanical Turk. Behav. Res. 44:11–23 [Google Scholar]
63. Pooley SP, Mendelsohn JA, Milner-Gulland EJ. 63.  2014. Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science. Conserv. Biol. 28:122–32 [Google Scholar]
64. Parsons MA, Boero F, Cohn JP, Godøy Ø, LeDrew E. 64.  et al. 2011. A conceptual framework for managing very diverse data for complex, interdisciplinary science. J. Inf. Sci. 37:6555–69 [Google Scholar]
65. Kareiva P, Marvier M. 65.  2012. What is conservation science?. BioScience 62:11962–69 [Google Scholar]
66. Wolf KL, Blahna DJ, Brinkley W, Romolini M. 66.  2013. Environmental stewardship footprint research: linking human agency and ecosystem health in the Puget Sound region. Urban Ecosyst. 16:13–32 [Google Scholar]
67. Ellis EC, Antill EC, Kreft H. 67.  2012. All is not loss: plant biodiversity in the Anthropocene. PLOS ONE 7:1e30535 [Google Scholar]
68. Ellis EC, Haff PK. 68.  2009. Earth Science in the Anthropocene: new epoch, new paradigm, new responsibilities. Eos Trans. Am. Geophys. Union 90:49473 [Google Scholar]
69. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM. 69.  2005. Biocomplexity in coupled natural-human systems: a multidimensional framework. Ecosystems 8:3225–32 [Google Scholar]
70. Martin J, Runge MC, Nichols JD, Lubow BC, Kendall WL. 70.  2009. Structured decision making as a conceptual framework to identify thresholds for conservation and management. Ecol. Appl. 19:51079–90 [Google Scholar]
71. Goodchild MF, Anselin L, Appelbaum RP, Harthorn BH. 71.  2000. Toward spatially integrated social science. Int. Reg. Sci. Rev. 23:2139–59 [Google Scholar]
72. Hochachka WM, Fink D, Hutchinson RA, Sheldon D, Wong W-K, Kelling S. 72.  2012. Data-intensive science applied to broad-scale citizen science. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27:2130–37A stand-out publication that weaves together data sciences with ecological data, illustrating some next-generation data-mining techniques. [Google Scholar]
73. Xue Y, Dilkina B, Damoulas T, Fink D, Gomes CP, Kelling S. 73.  2013. Improving Your Chances: Boosting Citizen Science Discovery. Proc. 1st AAAI Conf. Hum. Comput. Crowdsourc., Palm Springs, Nov. 7–9198–206 Palo Alto, CA: Assoc. Adv. Artif. Intell. [Google Scholar]
74. Grove JM, Burch W Jr. 74.  1997. A social ecology approach and applications of urban ecosystem and landscape analyses: a case study of Baltimore, Maryland. Urban Ecosyst. 1:4259–75 [Google Scholar]
75. Reif JÃ, Böhning-Gaese K, Flade M, Schwarz J, Schwager M. 75.  2011. Population trends of birds across the iron curtain: brain matters. Biol. Conserv. 144:102524–33 [Google Scholar]
76. Hufford M, Taylor B. 76.  2013. Edgework in boundary crossings: assessing foundations for public ecology in the Appalachian region. Environmental Considerations in Energy Production JR Craynon 99–110 Englewood, CO: Soc. Min. Metall. Explor. [Google Scholar]
77. Tidball KG, Krasny ME. 77.  2012. What role for citizen science in disaster and conflict. See Ref. 100 226–34
78. MacKerron G, Mourato S. 78.  2013. Happiness is greater in natural environments. Glob. Environ. Change 23:5992–1000One of the first publications to examine a social outcome alongside ecological data. [Google Scholar]
79. Purdam K. 79.  2014. Citizen social science and citizen data? Methodological and ethical challenges for social research. Curr. Sociol. 62:3374–92 [Google Scholar]
80. Becker M, Caminiti S, Fiorella D, Francis L, Pietro Gravino. 80.  et al. 2013. Awareness and learning in participatory noise sensing. PLOS ONE 8:12e81638 [Google Scholar]
81. Paulos E, Honicky RJ, Hooker B. 81.  2009. Citizen science: enabling participatory urbanism. Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City M Foth 414–36 Hershey, PA: IGI Glob. [Google Scholar]
82. Boyd D, Crawford K. 82.  2012. Critical questions for big data. Inf. Commun. Soc. 15:5662–79 [Google Scholar]
83. Dong W, Lepri B, Pentland A. 83.  2011. Modeling the co-evolution of behaviors and social relationships using mobile phone data. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Mob. Ubiquitous Multimed., Beijing, China, Dec. 7–9134–43 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
84. Vicente MR, Gil-de-Bernabé F. 84.  2010. Assessing the broadband gap: from the penetration divide to the quality divide. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 77:5816–22 [Google Scholar]
85. Maisonneuve N, Stevens M, Niessen ME, Hanappe P, Steels L. 85.  2009. Citizen noise pollution monitoring. Proc. 10th Annu. Int. Conf. Digit. Gov. Res. Soc. Netw. Mak. Connect. Between Citiz. Data Gov. Puebla, Mex., May 17–2196–103 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
86. Attari S, DeKay M, Davidson C, Bruine de Bruin W. 86.  2010. Public perceptions of energy consumption and savings. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107:3716054 [Google Scholar]
87. Forbes SG. 87.  2011. Following you here, there, and everywhere; an investigation of GPS technology, privacy, and the Fourth Amendment. John Marshall Law Rev. 45:11–22 [Google Scholar]
88. Bowser A, Wiggins A, Shanley L, Preece J, Henderson S. 88.  2014. Sharing data while protecting privacy in citizen science. Interactions 21:170–73 [Google Scholar]
89. Goodchild M. 89.  2007. Citizens as sensors: the world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal 69:211–21 [Google Scholar]
90. Yu J, Wong W-K, Hutchinson RA. 90.  2010. Modeling experts and novices in citizen science data for species distribution modeling. Proc. 10th IEEE Int. Conf. Data Min. (ICDM 2010), Sydney, Australia, Dec. 14–17. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE [Google Scholar]
91. Woolley AW, Chabris CF, Pentland A, Hashmi N, Malone TW. 91.  2010. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330:6004686–88 [Google Scholar]
92. Wiggins A, Crowston K. 92.  2010. Developing a conceptual model of virtual organisations for citizen science. Int. J. Organ. Des. Eng. 1:1/2148–62 [Google Scholar]
93. Evans DM. 93.  2013. Citizen science comes of age. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28:8451 [Google Scholar]
94. Henderson S. 94.  2012. Citizen science comes of age. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6283 [Google Scholar]
95. Abbott A. 95.  1991. The order of professionalization: an empirical analysis. Work Occup. 18:4355–84 [Google Scholar]
96. Bonter DN, Cooper CB. 96.  2012. Data validation in citizen science: a case study from Project FeederWatch. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6305–7 [Google Scholar]
97. Marshall NJ, Kleine DA, Dean AJ. 97.  2012. CoralWatch: education, monitoring, and sustainability through citizen science. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6332–34 [Google Scholar]
98. Pandya RE. 98.  2012. A framework for engaging diverse communities in citizen science in the US. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6314–17 [Google Scholar]
99. Oberhauser KS, LeBuhn G. 99.  2012. Insects and plants: engaging undergraduates in authentic research through citizen science. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6318–20 [Google Scholar]
100. Dickinson JL, Bonney RE. 100.  2012. Citizen Science: Public Participation in Environmental Research Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
101. Bonney RE, Ballard HL, Jordan R, McCallie E, Phillips TB. 101.  et al. 2009. Public participation in scientific research: defining the field and assessing its potential for informal science education A CAISE Inq. Group Rep., Cent. Adv. Informal Sci. Educ., Washington, DC Landmark publication summarizing the state and possible future of citizen science, especially related to science education.
102. McEver C, Bonney RE, Dickinson JL, Kelling S, Rosenberg KV, Shirk JL. 102.  2007. Proceedings of the Citizen Science Toolkit Conference Ithaca, NY: Cornell Lab. Ornithol.
103. 103. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., Cent. Biodivers. Conserv., Audubon, Cornell Lab Ornithol 2011. Engaging and learning for conservation. Workshop Summ., Cornell Lab Ornithol., Ithaca, NY. http://www.birds.cornell.edu/citscitoolkit/conference/ppsr2011/engaging-and-learning-for-conservation-workshop-summary
104. 104. Cigdem Adem 2011. Lay, local, traditional knowledge and citizen science: their roles in monitoring and assessment of the environment Summ. Rep., Workshop June 27–28, ed. D Gee, Eur. Environ. Agency Workshop, Copenhagen, Den.
105. Benz S, Miller-Rushing A, Domroese M, Bonney R, DeFalco T. 105.  et al. 2013. Workshop 1: conference on public participation in scientific research 2012: an international, interdisciplinary conference. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 941112–17
106. Newman G, Graham J, Crall AW, Laituri M. 106.  2011. The art and science of multi-scale citizen science support. Ecol. Inform. 6:3217–27 [Google Scholar]
107. Newman G, Zimmerman D, Crall A, Laituri M, Graham J, Stapel L. 107.  2010. User-friendly Web mapping: lessons from a citizen science website. Int. J. Geogr. Info. Sci. 24:121851–69 [Google Scholar]
108. Alabri A, Hunter J. 108.  2010. Enhancing the quality and trust of citizen science data. Proc. IEEE 6th Int. Conf. e-Science (e-Science), Brisbane, QLD, Dec. 7–1081–88 Piscataway, NJ: IEEE [Google Scholar]
109. Hunter J, Alabri A, van Ingen C. 109.  2013. Assessing the quality and trustworthiness of citizen science data. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 25:454–66 [Google Scholar]
110. Hampton SE, Strasser CA, Tewksbury JJ, Gram WK, Budden AE. 110.  et al. 2013. Big data and the future of ecology. Front. Ecol. Environ. 11:3156–62 [Google Scholar]
111. Szabo JK, Vesk PA, Baxter PWJ, Possingham HP. 111.  2010. Regional avian species declines estimated from volunteer-collected long-term data using List Length Analysis. Ecol. Appl. 20:82157–69 [Google Scholar]
112. Worthington JP, Silvertown J, Cook L, Cameron R, Dodd M. 112.  et al. 2012. Evolution MegaLab: a case study in citizen science methods. Methods Ecol. Evol. 3:2303–9 [Google Scholar]
113. Wiggins A, Bonney RE, Graham E, Henderson S, Kelling S. 113.  et al. 2013. Data Management Guide for Public Participation in Scientific Research Albuquerque, NM: DataONE
114. Boero F. 114.  2013. Observational articles: a tool to reconstruct ecological history based on chronicling unusual events. F1000Research 2:168–75 [Google Scholar]
115. Cox TE, Philippoff J, Oberhauser KS, Baumgartner E, Smith CM. 115.  2012. Expert variability provides perspective on the strengths and weaknesses of citizen-driven intertidal monitoring program. Front. Ecol. Environ. 22:41201–12 [Google Scholar]
116. Rochet MJ, Prigent M, Bertrand JA, Carpentier A, Coppin F. 116.  et al. 2008. Ecosystem trends: evidence for agreement between fishers' perceptions and scientific information. J. Mar. Sci. 65:61057–68 [Google Scholar]
117. Ruiz-Mallén Corbera E. 117.  2013. Community-based conservation and traditional ecological knowledge: implications for social-ecological resilience. Ecol. Soc. 18:412 [Google Scholar]
118. Olsson P, Folke C. 118.  2001. Local ecological knowledge and institutional dynamics for ecosystem management: a study of Lake Racken watershed, Sweden. Ecosystems 4:285–104 [Google Scholar]
119. Mazzocchi F. 119.  2006. Western science and traditional knowledge: Despite their variations, different forms of knowledge can learn from each other. EMBO Rep. 7:5463–66 [Google Scholar]
120. Marshall K, Hamlin J, Armstrong M, Mendoza J, Lee C. 120.  et al. 2011. Science for a social revolution: ecologists entering the realm of action. Bull. Ecol. Soc. Am. 92:3241–43 [Google Scholar]
121. Huntington HP, Gearheard S, Mahoney AR, Salomon AK. 121.  2011. Integrating traditional and scientific knowledge through collaborative natural science field research: identifying elements for success. Arctic 64:4437–45 [Google Scholar]
122. Ignatowski JA, Rosales J. 122.  2013. Identifying the exposure of two subsistence villages in Alaska to climate change using traditional ecological knowledge. Clim. Change 121:285–99 [Google Scholar]
123. Sundaram B, Krishnan S, Hiremath AJ, Joseph G. 123.  2012. Ecology and impacts of the invasive species, Lantana camara, in a social-ecological system in south India: perspectives from local knowledge. Hum. Ecol. 40:6931–42 [Google Scholar]
124. Armitage D, Marschke M, Plummer R. 124.  2008. Adaptive co-management and the paradox of learning. Glob. Environ. Change 18:186–98 [Google Scholar]
125. 125. Socientize, Eur. Comm 2013. Green Paper on Citizen Science: Citizen Science for Europe. Zaragoza, Spain: Socientize
126. González N, Moll LC, Amanti C. 126.  2005. Funds of Knowledge: Theorizing Practices in Households, Communities, and Classrooms New York: Routledge
127. Goffredo S, Pensa F, Neri P, Orlandi A, Gagliardi MS. 127.  et al. 2010. Unite research with what citizens do for fun: “recreational monitoring” of marine biodiversity. Ecol. Appl. 20:82170–87 [Google Scholar]
128. Chu M, Leondard P, Stevenson F. 128.  2012. Growing the base for citizen science: recruiting and engaging participants. See Ref. 100 69–81
129. Parsons J, Lukyanenko R, Wiersma Y. 129.  2011. Easier citizen science is better. Nature 471:733637 [Google Scholar]
130. Hobbs SJ, White PC. 130.  2012. Motivations and barriers in relation to community participation in biodiversity recording. J. Nat. Conserv. 20:364–73 [Google Scholar]
131. Cosquer A, Raymond R, Prevot-Julliard A-C. 131.  2012. Observations of everyday biodiversity: a new perspective for conservation?. Ecol. Soc. 17:42 [Google Scholar]
132. Kremen C, Ullman KS, Thorp RW. 132.  2011. Evaluating the quality of citizen-scientist data on pollinator communities. Conserv. Biol. 25:3607–17 [Google Scholar]
133. Lovell S, Hamer M, Slotow R, Herbert D. 133.  2009. An assessment of the use of volunteers for terrestrial invertebrate biodiversity surveys. Biodivers. Conserv. 18:123295–307 [Google Scholar]
134. Nov O, Arazy O, Anderson D. 134.  2011. Dusting for science: motivation and participation of digital citizen science volunteers. Proc. 2011 iConf., Feb. 8–11, 2011, Seattle, WA68–74 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
135. Stafford R, Hart AG, Collins L, Kirkhope CL, Williams RL. 135.  et al. 2010. Eu-social science: the role of Internet social networks in the collection of bee biodiversity data. PLOS ONE 5:12e14381 [Google Scholar]
136. Switzer A, Schwille K, Russell E, Edelson D. 136.  2012. National Geographic FieldScope: a platform for community geography. Front. Ecol. Environ. 10:6334–35 [Google Scholar]
137. Vygotsky LS. 137.  1978. Mind in Society Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
138. Wenger E. 138.  2000. Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization 7:2225–46 [Google Scholar]
139. Lejano RP, Ingram H. 139.  2009. Collaborative networks and new ways of knowing. Environ. Sci. Policy 12:6653–62 [Google Scholar]
140. Crutzen PJ. 140.  2002. Geology of mankind. Nature 415:686723 [Google Scholar]
141. Matteson KC, Taron DJ, Minor ES. 141.  2012. Assessing citizen contributions to butterfly monitoring in two large cities. Conserv. Biol. 26:3557–64 [Google Scholar]
142. Raddick MJ, Bracey G, Gay PL, Lintott CJ, Murray P. 142.  et al. 2010. Galaxy zoo: Exploring the motivations of citizen science volunteers. Astron. Educ. Rev. 9:1 [Google Scholar]
143. Tulloch AIT, Mustin K, Possingham HP, Szabo JK, Wilson KA. 143.  2013. To boldly go where no volunteer has gone before: predicting volunteer activity to prioritize surveys at the landscape scale. Divers. Distrib. 19:465–80 [Google Scholar]
144. Cornwell ML, Campbell LM. 144.  2011. Co-producing conservation and knowledge: Citizen-based sea turtle monitoring in North Carolina, USA. Soc. Stud. Sci. 42:1101–20One of a handful of publications that shows evidence of contested relationships between project organizers and volunteer participants. [Google Scholar]
145. Fernandez-Gimenez ME, Ballard HL, Sturtevant VE. 145.  2008. Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: a study of five community-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecol. Soc. 13:24 [Google Scholar]
146. Kountoupes DL, Oberhauser KS. 146.  2012. Citizen science and youth audiences: educational outcomes of the Monarch Larva Monitoring Project. J. Community Engagem. Scholarsh. 1:110–20 [Google Scholar]