Can citizen science increase trust in research? A case study of delineating Polish metropolitan areas

Abstract

We assess the relationship between citizens’ participation in scientific research and public trust in research results within social sciences. We conduct an online citizen science quasi-experiment concerning the delineation of metropolitan areas of Poland’s two major cities. It consists of two stages. In stage one, participants in one region are exposed to citizen science and directly involved in delineating the boundaries of their local metropolitan area. In stage two, we add another region in which participants are not involved in the research process. In both regions we ask the participants to evaluate the level of their trust in the presented maps of respective metropolitan areas: based on citizen science in one region and historical data regression analysis in the other region. Our contribution to the literature lies in two areas. First, we demonstrate how citizen science can be used in urban studies to delineate boundaries of urban and metropolitan areas exhibiting strong functional connections. Second, we show that the participation of local residents in the research process increases public trust in the study results compared to non-participatory ‘traditional academic’ research. These results confirm that citizen science programs deserve to be strongly supported by European institutions as a possible means to resolving the credibility crisis of science, research and evidence-based policies.

Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavor: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation

“…Participatory input from citizens can help shape research to address the needs of those affected by it (Bruin & Bostrom, 2013;Ziegler et al, 2022). It can also generate interest and understanding from the public in how the research is conducted and evaluated (Bonney, Phillips, Ballard, & Enck, 2015;Cottrell et al, 2014), thereby building trust in scientific messages (Bedessem, Gawrońska-Novak, & Lis, 2021;Tan et al, 2022).…”

Science Communication as a Collective Intelligence Endeavour: A Manifesto and Examples for Implementation

“…Participatory input from citizens can help shape research to address the needs of those affected by it (Bruin & Bostrom, 2013;Ziegler et al, 2022). It can also generate interest and understanding from the public in how the research is conducted and evaluated (Bonney, Phillips, Ballard, & Enck, 2015;Cottrell et al, 2014), thereby building trust in scientific messages (Bedessem, Gawrońska-Novak, & Lis, 2021;Tan et al, 2022).…”

Toppling the Ivory Tower: Increasing Public Participation in Research Through Open and Citizen Science

“…It is possible that publishers fear the potential decrease in revenue caused by adopting open science policies. However, the potential decrease in income is insignificant compared to the threat to public trust caused by inaccessible science (Bedessem, Gawrońska-Novak, and Lis 2021).…”

“…Research is then able to proceed faster than if only a limited professional circle participated (Woelfle, Olliaro, and Todd 2011). By supporting open science and public participation, it may also be possible to accelerate progress on the SDGs while improving the public's relationship to research (Bedessem, Gawrońska-Novak, and Lis 2021). Open science practices also offer a plethora of potential benefits for researchers.…”