References
- 1Aceves-Bueno, E, Adeleye, AS, Feraud, M, Huang, Y, Tao, M, Yang, Y and Anderson, SE. 2017. The accuracy of citizen science data: a quantitative review. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 98: 278–290. DOI: 10.1002/bes2.1336
- 2Ahn, MK, Chilakala, R, Han, C and Thenepalli, T. 2018. Removal of hardness from water samples by a carbonation process with a closed pressure reactor. Water, 10(54). DOI: 10.3390/w10010054
- 3Babich, R, Craig, E, Muscat, A, Disney, J, Farrell, A, Silka, L and Jayasundara, N. 2021. Defining drinking water metal contaminant mixture risk by coupling zebrafish behavioral analysis with citizen science. Scienfic Reports, 11: 17303. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96244-4
- 4Brouwer, S and Hessels, LK. 2019. Increasing research impact with citizen science: the influence of recruitment strategies on sample diversity. Public Understanding of Science, 28: 606–621. DOI: 10.1177/0963662519840934
- 5Brouwer, S and Sjerps, R. 2018. Klantperspectieven, Nieuwegein, BTO 2018.083, KWR.
- 6Brouwer, S, Pieron, M, Sjerps, R and Etty, T. 2019. Perspectives beyond the meter: A Q-study for modern segmentation of drinking water customers. Water Policy, 21: 1224–1238. DOI: 10.2166/wp.2019.078
- 7Brouwer, S, Van Der Wielen, PWJJ, Schriks, M, Claassen, M and Frijns, J. 2018. Public participation in science: The future and value of citizen science in the drinking water research. Water, 10: 284. DOI: 10.3390/w10030284
- 8Capdevila, ASL, Kokimova, A, Ray, SS, Avellán, T, Kim, J and Kirschke, S. 2020. Success factors for citizen science projects in water quality monitoring. Science of the Total Environment, 728:
137843 . DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137843 - 9Church, SP, Payne, LB, Peel, S and Prokopy, LS. 2019. Beyond water data: benefits to volunteers and to local water from a citizen science program. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62: 306–326. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2017.1415869
- 10D’Alessio, M, Rushing, G and Gray, TL. 2021. Monitoring water quality through citizen science while teaching STEM undergraduate courses during a global pandemic. Science of The Total Environment, 779:
146547 . DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146547 - 11Da Silva, RJNB. 2013. Setting Target Measurement Uncertainty in Water Analysis. Water, 5: 1279–1302. DOI: 10.3390/w5031279
- 12Egerer, MH, Lin, BB and Philpott, SM. 2018. Water use behavior, learning, and adaptation to future change in urban gardens. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 2: 71. DOI: 10.3389/fsufs.2018.00071
- 13Euramet. 2011.
Guidelines on the Estimation of Uncertainty in Hardness Measurements . Version 2.0 (03/2011) ed. Braunschweig: EURAMET e.V. - 14Ferri, M, Wehn, U, See, L, Monego, M and Fritz, S. 2020. The value of citizen science for flood risk reduction: cost–benefit analysis of a citizen observatory in the Brenta-Bacchiglione catchment. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 24: 5781–5798. DOI: 10.5194/hess-24-5781-2020
- 15Groenendijk, M, Van De Wetering, S and Van Nieuwenhuijze, R. 2008. Central water softening: Customer comfort is relevant in new WHO view. Water Science and Technology: Water Supply, 8: 69–74. DOI: 10.2166/ws.2008.036
- 16Harriden, K. 2013. Water Diaries: generate intra-household water use data – generate water use behaviour change. Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, 3: 70–80. DOI: 10.2166/washdev.2013.015
- 17Haywood, BK. 2016. Beyond data points and research contributions: the personal meaning and value associated with public participation in scientific research. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 6: 239–262. DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2015.1043659
- 18Irwin, A. 1995. Citizen science: A study of people, expertise and sustainable development, London, New-York, Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203202395
- 19Jakositz, S, Pillsbury, L, Greenwood, S, Fahnestock, M, Mcgreavy, B, Bryce, J and Mo, W. 2020. Protection through participation: Crowdsourced tap water quality monitoring for enhanced public health. Water research, 169:
115209 . DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.115209 - 20Jordan, RC, Gray, SA, Howe, DV, Brooks, WR and Ehrenfeld, JG. 2011. Knowledge gain and behavioral change in citizen-science programs. Conservation biology, 25: 1148–1154. DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01745.x
- 21Koop, SHA, Clevers, SHP, Blokker, EJM and Brouwer, S. 2021. Public Attitudes towards Digital Water Meters for Households. Sustainability, 13: 6440. DOI: 10.3390/su13116440
- 22Land-Zandstra, A, Agnello, G and Gültekin, YS. 2021.
Participants in Citizen Science . In: Vohland, K, Land-Zandstra, A, Ceccaroni, L, Lemmens, R, Perelló, J, Ponti, M, Samson, R and Wagenknecht, K. (eds.), The Science of Citizen Science. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4 - 23Lanz, B and Provins, A. 2016. The demand for tap water quality: Survey evidence on water hardness and aesthetic quality. Water Resources and Economics, 16: 52–63. DOI: 10.1016/j.wre.2016.10.001
- 24Li, P and Wu, J. 2019. Drinking water quality and public health. Exposure and Health, 11: 73–79. DOI: 10.1007/s12403-019-00299-8
- 25Loperfido, JV, Beyer, P, Just, CL and Schnoor, JL. 2010. Uses and biases of volunteer water quality data. Environmental Science & Technology, 44: 7193–7199. DOI: 10.1021/es100164c
- 26Njue, N, Kroese, JS, Gräf, J, Jacobs, S, Weeser, B, Breuer, L and Rufino, M. 2019. Citizen science in hydrological monitoring and ecosystem services management: State of the art and future prospects. Science of the Total Environment, 693:
133531 . DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.337 - 27Odetola, L, Sills, S and Morrison, S. 2021. A pilot study on the feasibility of testing residential tap water in North Carolina: Implications for environmental justice and health. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology. DOI: 10.1038/s41370-021-00352-2
- 28Pudifoot, B, Cárdenas, ML, Buytaert, W, Paul, JD, Narraway, CL and Loiselle, S. 2021. When it rains, it pours: Integrating citizen science methods to understand resilience of urban green spaces. Frontiers in Water, 3:
654493 . DOI: 10.3389/frwa.2021.654493 - 29Redmon, JH, Levine, KE, Aceituno, AM, Litzenberger, K and Gibson, JM. 2020. Lead in drinking water at North Carolina childcare centers: Piloting a citizen science-based testing strategy. Environmental research, 183:
109126 . DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109126 - 30Roy, S and Edwards, M. 2019. Citizen Science During the Flint, Michigan Federal Water Emergency: Ethical Dilemmas and Lessons Learned. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4: 12. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.154
- 31Sharma, M, Sharma, R and McBean, EA. 2014. Enhancing confidence in drinking water quality for improved risk decisions. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 20(5): 1281–1290. DOI: 10.1080/10807039.2013.828514
- 32Shirk, JL, Ballard, HL, Wilderman, CC, Phillips, T, Wiggins, A, Jordan, R, Mccallie, E, Minarchek, M, Lewenstein, BV and Krasny, ME. 2012. Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society, 17: 29 DOI: 10.5751/ES-04705-170229
- 33Stepenuck, KF and Green, LT. 2015. Individual-and community-level impacts of volunteer environmental monitoring: a synthesis of peer-reviewed literature. Ecology and society, 20: 19. DOI: 10.5751/ES-07329-200319
- 34Storey, RG, Wright-Stow, A, Kin, E, Davies-Colley, RJ and Stott, R. 2016. Volunteer stream monitoring: Do the data quality and monitoring experience support increased community involvement in freshwater decision making? Ecology and Society, 21: 32. DOI: 10.5751/ES-08934-210432
- 35Topping, M and Kolok, A. 2021. Assessing the accuracy of nitrate concentration data for water quality monitoring using visual and cell phone quantification methods. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6: 1, 5. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.346
- 36Walker, DW, Smigaj, M and Tani, M. 2021. The benefits and negative impacts of citizen science applications to water as experienced by participants and communities. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 8:
e1488 . DOI: 10.1002/wat2.1488