| Title |
Evaluating the Performance of Volunteers in Mapping Invasive Plants in Public Conservation Lands
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Management, December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00267-011-9789-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rebecca C. Jordan, Wesley R. Brooks, David V. Howe, Joan G. Ehrenfeld |
| Abstract |
Citizen science programs are touted as useful tools for engaging the public in science and for collecting important data for scientists and resource managers. To accomplish the latter, it must be shown that data collected by volunteers is sufficiently accurate and reliable. We engaged 119 volunteers over three years to map and estimate abundance of invasive plants in New York and New Jersey parklands. We tested their accuracy via collected pressed samples and by subsampling their transect points. We also compared the performances of volunteers and botanical experts. Our results support the notion that volunteer participation can enhance the data generated by scientists alone. We found that the quality of data collected might be affected by the environment in which the data are collected. We suggest that giving consideration to how people learn can not only help to achieve educational goals but can also help to produce more data to be used in scientific study. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 4% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 118 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 28 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 44 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 3% |
| Engineering | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 21 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2014.
All research outputs
#6,753,656
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#571
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,178
of 246,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 246,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.