Crowd science: It is not just a matter of time (or funding)

Abstract

Citizen science, or crowd science, or volunteer science, has increased in the last 4–5 years, with an accompanying increase in the literature. The main argument in such literature is that citizen science has many advantages, not only for scientists and the science that is produced, but also for the participating citizens. As a result of this line of reasoning, the main issue becomes: How we can facilitate citizen science, and help it expand to more projects, and involve more (types of) participants? My aim in this opinion paper is to make 2 points: First, that most recent work on citizen science fails to elaborate on the new types of relationships, practices, and interactions that are facilitated by information and communication technologies, when compared to traditional volunteer science. The second point is that there are pronounced disciplinary differences among citizen science projects, something that, again, is generally being missed in much recent work. Missing these points can lead us to imagine that it's only a matter of time (and of course funding) before all sciences catch up with citizen science. Such a line of thought can result in investing resources (money, time, effort) in projects and infrastructures that are doomed to fail, because of their topic or field of research. I conclude by offering some thoughts on a research agenda.