Citizen Seismology, Stalinist Science, and Vladimir Mannar’s Cold Wars

Aronova, Elena

doi:10.1177/0162243916687643

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Amateurs and eyewitnesses were relied upon for observations before the development of measuring tools (Ferreira, 2019) and after their introduction, to compensate for a lack of data or to complement it. Indeed, their testimonies have contributed to mapping the effects of earthquakes (Aronova, 2017). However, the way citizens take part in seismology is evolving, especially with the rise of new technologies, including smartphones and new types of seismic sensors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Citizen Seismology Without Seismologists? Lessons Learned From Mayotte Leading to Improved Collaboration

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Starting the 10th May 2018, a series of earthquakes has hit Mayotte, a French island in the Indian Ocean. Facing a lack of seismic data, scientific information and communication from the authorities, the inhabitants took advantage of social media to develop, on their own, a citizen seismology group, composed of more than 10,000 people. Due to a particular cultural context, this was carried out mainly without the seismologist community. While some citizens did share seismological information (and eventually volcanology information when it was discovered that the earthquakes were caused by a newborn , undersea volcano), the lack of seismologists in the group also lead to the emergence of misinformation and even conspiracy theories. This mistrusting atmosphere had negative consequences for the way various seismological organizations were perceived, including LastQuake, a crowdsource-based earthquake information app which allows eyewitnesses to share information about earthquakes they felt, combined with seismic data. However, due to the lack of seismic data for these earthquakes, some were not displayed in the app. This lack of information and understanding of how the system functioned led to additional mistrust toward this citizen seismology tool. This paper combines sociological observations with an empirical approach. First, a sociological analysis of this independent citizen science network enables an identification of the reasons for its creation and the pitfalls caused by the absence of collaboration with the scientific community. Then, an empirical case study of the LastQuake system exposes how it has been improved to offer information, while admittedly more incomplete, is nevertheless closer to citizens' needs. It concludes that citizen seismology requires a stronger collaboration between citizens' and scientists' communities in order to be more efficient. It also advocates for scientific communication that takes into account cultural context from the beginning.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It also implies the need to reflect on the mutual relationship between citizens and seismologists and how they interact. Mutual trust, as well as communication, is an essential part of citizen science (Aronova, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen Seismology Without Seismologists? Lessons Learned From Mayotte Leading to Improved Collaboration

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This last strategy is well exemplified by the aborted attempt at participatory seismology in the U.S.S.R. in the early 1950s. For the sake of a centralised control of seismologic information, central Soviet authorities banned contributions from amateurs as well as the publication of any non‐official bulleting referring to earthquakes, classified as a state secret (Aronova, 2017).…”

Section: Technoscience Political Legitimation and Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Non‐experts’ participation in processes of scientific knowledge creation: The case of Citizen Science

Giardullo

2023

Sociology Compass

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public participation in science and technology, is currently being encouraged in order to fulfil the calls for a more engaging, transparent, and ethical way of governing technoscientific innovation. Several institutional documents argue for the need to enrol non‐scientists into research programs; funding schemes devoted to public engagement seem to be paving the way for new baselines for knowledge creation and innovation paths that include the contributions of citizens. Citizen Science stands out as an opportune movement to lead non‐scientists to contribute to scientific research projects and technological innovation, and it has given rise to a broad debate intersecting many sociological aspects linked to participation and community empowerment. However, the participation of non‐scientists in data collection, analysis, and interpretation is not totally new; yet it has not had the same value across time, nor has it always been considered desirable. Indeed, volunteers' engagement and amateurs' contributions have been regulated differently compared to the current rhetoric of participation. This paper gives an account of the evolution of participation of non‐experts through the lens of Science and Technology Studies, investigating its desirability, how it is governed, and whether it matches the promises of Citizen Science practitioners.

show abstract

“…The dynamics among science, citizen, and state only magnified in the twentieth century, across the ideological spectrum. For example, the Soviet Union erected science and technology on the pedestal of communist modernity, Jawaharlal Nehru championed science and modernization for a newly independent India, the United States scrambled to revamp its science curriculum after the shock of Sputnik, and Britain promoted "Public Understanding of Science" in the mid-1980s (see, e.g., Andrews 2003;Aronova 2017;Rudolph 2002;Bodmar 1985;and Miller 2001).…”

Section: Cs2-science State and Citizenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen, Science, and Citizen Science

Fan

Chen

2019

East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Jo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What Do We Talk about When We Talk about Citizen Science? The term citizen science has become very popular among scholars as well as the general public, and, given its growing presence in East Asia, it is perhaps not a moment too soon to have a special issue of EASTS on the topic. However, the quick expansion of citizen science, as a notion and a practice, has also spawned a mass of blurred meanings. The term is ill-defined and has been used in diverse ways. To avoid confusion, it is necessary to categorize the various and often ambiguous usages of the term and clarify their meanings. As in any taxonomy, there are as many typologies as the particular perspectives, parameters, and criteria adopted for classification. There have been helpful attempts at classifying different modes of citizen science (Cooper and Lewenstein 2016; Wiggins and Crowston 2012; Haklay 2012). However, they focused primarily on the different approaches or methods in citizen science. Ottinger's two categories of citizen science-"scientific authority driven" and "social movement based"-foreground the criteria of action and justification, but they unnecessarily juxtapose science and society; in any case, they may be too general and leaving out too much at the same time. 1

show abstract

Citizen Seismology, Stalinist Science, and Vladimir Mannar’s Cold Wars

Cited by 11 publications

References 54 publications

Citizen Seismology Without Seismologists? Lessons Learned From Mayotte Leading to Improved Collaboration

Citizen Seismology Without Seismologists? Lessons Learned From Mayotte Leading to Improved Collaboration

Non‐experts’ participation in processes of scientific knowledge creation: The case of Citizen Science

Citizen, Science, and Citizen Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About