2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108195
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tradeoffs and tools for data quality, privacy, transparency, and trust in citizen science

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(41 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
38
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Visualization‐based interfaces can play a key role in helping data owners, subjects, custodians, and consumers dynamically evaluate the disclosure risks of shared data. For data owners or custodians, visual interfaces [GHK*16, CRVFS15] can help communicate privacy risks by suggesting non‐obvious, probabilistic linkages [HWL*19], let them dynamically evaluate the trade‐offs among data utility and privacy risks [ADSZ*19] by visualizing privacy outcomes from new and evolving metrics [JSH*17], and make more confident decisions regarding data sharing [BVM*17].…”
Section: Gaps and Research Opportunitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Visualization‐based interfaces can play a key role in helping data owners, subjects, custodians, and consumers dynamically evaluate the disclosure risks of shared data. For data owners or custodians, visual interfaces [GHK*16, CRVFS15] can help communicate privacy risks by suggesting non‐obvious, probabilistic linkages [HWL*19], let them dynamically evaluate the trade‐offs among data utility and privacy risks [ADSZ*19] by visualizing privacy outcomes from new and evolving metrics [JSH*17], and make more confident decisions regarding data sharing [BVM*17].…”
Section: Gaps and Research Opportunitiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Scientific research must gather valid information, and while traditional citizen science uses trained volunteers to ensure data accuracy, it has participant limitations and requires more money and effort (Gardiner et al 2012). If they are untrained, the data from citizens can be problematic, and furthermore, it takes time for researchers to verify the information with each reporter (Goffredo et al 2010;Bird et al 2014;Anhalt-Depies et al 2019).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Providing simple language that enables users to understand their intellectual property rights for using CSD facilitates their use as open data. Ideally, such language should describe permissive intellectual property rights that eliminate restrictions on the use of the data and the documentation (Anhalt-Depies et al, 2019).…”
Section: Transparency In Information About Qa/qc Practices During the Data Production Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Especially given the increased opportunity to supplement traditional scientific data with CSD, it is essential that the CSD be as trustworthy and of known quality as other scientific data (Swanson et al, 2016;Aceves-Bueno et al, 2017;Budde et al, 2017;Burgess et al, 2017;Kallimanis et al, 2017;Steger et al, 2017;Sandahl and Tøttrup, 2020). Information about the quality of CSD builds trust, provides opportunities for potential users to discover CSD that are appropriate for their purposes, and enables users to determine whether and how the data can be used to meet their objectives (Alabri and Hunter, 2010;Hunter et al, 2013;Freitag et al, 2016;Lukyanenko et al, 2016;Stevenson, 2018;Anhalt-Depies et al, 2019). The quality of CSD also can influence the analysis and interpretation of the data (Kelling et al, 2015;Clare et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%