Crowd science user contribution patterns and their implications

Abstract

Scientific research performed with the involvement of the broader public (the crowd) attracts increasing attention from scientists and policy makers. A key premise is that project organizers may be able to draw on underused human resources to advance research at relatively low cost. Despite a growing number of examples, systematic research on the effort contributions volunteers are willing to make to crowd science projects is lacking. Analyzing data on seven different projects, we quantify the financial value volunteers can bring by comparing their unpaid contributions with counterfactual costs in traditional or online labor markets. The volume of total contributions is substantial, although some projects are much more successful in attracting effort than others. Moreover, contributions received by projects are very uneven across time-a tendency toward declining activity is interrupted by spikes typically resulting from outreach efforts or media attention. Analyzing user-level data, we find that most contributors participate only once and with little effort, leaving a relatively small share of users who return responsible for most of the work. Although top contributor status is earned primarily through higher levels of effort, top contributors also tend to work faster. This speed advantage develops over multiple sessions, suggesting that it reflects learning rather than inherent differences in skills. Our findings inform recent discussions about potential benefits from crowd science, suggest that involving the crowd may be more effective for some kinds of projects than others, provide guidance for project managers, and raise important questions for future research.

Exploring the quantum speed limit with computer games

“…To encourage players to search for fast solutions necessary for realistic quantum computations, and to probe the region around the QSL, we introduce a time penalty in the game structure. For a thorough discussion on the Quantum Moves player demographics, including their scientific backgrounds, we refer the reader to [31] and for a similar analysis of Zooniverse.org players see [32].…”

Citizen science participation in research in the environmental sciences: key factors related to projects’ success and longevity

“…Long term commitment (more than one year) (41%) exceeded the cases of short term and one time participation (33% and 15%, respectively, Figure 7d). Pareto's rule characterizes output from citizen science or many crowdsourcing activities such as Wikipedia, where most data is obtained by a minority of very dedicated participants (Sauermann and Franzoni 2015). Likewise, commitment is related to person motivation, participation costs and time requirements.…”

Geodemographic biases in crowdsourced knowledge websites: Do neighbours fill in the blanks?

“…Crowdsourced knowledge projects are typically characterized by openness: anyone can in principle become a contributor, and indeed most such projects encourage anyone who might be interested to sign up (Franzoni and Sauermann 2014). In addition to being free to join, such efforts are of course also free to leave: meaning that many people who do contribute do so for only a short amount of time, whilst the majority of content is produced by a small minority of committed users (Cobo et al 2016;Haklay 2016;Panciera et al 2009;Sauermann and Franzoni 2015). Hence the nature of the people that do end up both joining and in particular staying is a key area of research interest.…”