Museum für Naturkunde Berlin, Leibniz Institute for Evolution and Biodiversity Science, Berlin, Germany.
Life Sciences Faculty, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
PLoS One. 2021 Jun 28;16(6):e0253763. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0253763. eCollection 2021.
Citizen science is an approach that has become increasingly popular in recent years. Despite this growing popularity, there still is widespread scepticism in the academic world about the validity and quality of data from citizen science projects. And although there might be great potential, citizen science is a rarely used approach in the field of bioacoustics. To better understand the possibilities, but also the limitations, we here evaluated data generated in a citizen science project on nightingale song as a case study. We analysed the quantity and quality of song recordings made in a non-standardized way with a smartphone app by citizen scientists and the standardized recordings made with professional equipment by academic researchers. We made comparisons between the recordings of the two approaches and among the user types of the app to gain insights into the temporal recording patterns, the quantity and quality of the data. To compare the deviation of the acoustic parameters in the recordings with smartphones and professional devices from the original song recordings, we conducted a playback test. Our results showed that depending on the user group, citizen scientists produced many to a lot of recordings of valid quality for further bioacoustic research. Differences between the recordings provided by the citizen and the expert group were mainly caused by the technical quality of the devices used-and to a lesser extent by the citizen scientists themselves. Especially when differences in spectral parameters are to be investigated, our results demonstrate that the use of the same high-quality recording devices and calibrated external microphones would most likely improve data quality. We conclude that many bioacoustic research questions may be carried out with the recordings of citizen scientists. We want to encourage academic researchers to get more involved in participatory projects to harness the potential of citizen science-and to share scientific curiosity and discoveries more directly with society.
公民科学是近年来越来越流行的一种方法。尽管这种方法越来越受欢迎,但学术界仍然普遍对公民科学项目数据的有效性和质量持怀疑态度。尽管公民科学可能具有巨大的潜力,但它在生物声学领域的应用却很少。为了更好地理解其可能性,但也了解其局限性,我们以鸣禽歌声的公民科学项目为例进行了评估。我们分析了公民科学家使用智能手机应用程序以非标准化方式录制的歌曲以及学术研究人员使用专业设备录制的标准化歌曲的数量和质量。我们比较了这两种方法的录音以及应用程序的用户类型,以深入了解时间记录模式、数据的数量和质量。为了比较智能手机和专业设备录制的录音与原始歌曲录音之间的声学参数偏差,我们进行了回放测试。结果表明,根据用户群体的不同,公民科学家录制了许多具有有效质量的录音,可用于进一步的生物声学研究。公民组和专家组提供的录音之间的差异主要是由使用的设备的技术质量造成的,而公民科学家本身的影响较小。特别是当要研究光谱参数的差异时,我们的结果表明,使用相同的高质量录音设备和校准的外部麦克风很可能会提高数据质量。我们得出结论,许多生物声学研究问题可以使用公民科学家的录音来开展。我们鼓励学术研究人员更多地参与参与式项目,以利用公民科学的潜力,并更直接地与社会分享科学好奇心和发现。