Who Engages in Citizen Science Projects on Urban Wildlife Ecology? Findings on Participant Groups from Cluster Analyses
References
- Anhalt-Depies, C., Berland, M., Rickenbach, M. G., Bemowski, R., and Rissman, A. R. (2023) Use of latent profile analysis to characterise patterns of participation in crowdsourcing. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(10), pp.1487–1495. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2022.2081820
- Aristeidou, M., Scanlon, E., and Sharples, M. (2017) Profiles of engagement in online communities of citizen science participation. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, pp. 246–256. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.044
- Bonney, R., Phillips, T. B., Ballard, H. L., and Enck, J. W. (2016) Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), pp. 2–16. DOI: 10.1177/0963662515607406
- Bruckermann, T., Bock, D., Greving, H., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Hagen, R., et al. (2026) Attitudes and motivation influence how participants engage in different scientific activities in the online community of a citizen science project. Behaviour & Information Technology, pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2026.2641601
- Bruckermann, T., Greving, H., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Kimmig, S. E., Hagen, R., et al. (2021a) To know about science is to love it? Unraveling cause–effect relationships between knowledge and attitudes toward science in citizen science on urban wildlife ecology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(8), pp. 1179–1202. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21697
- Bruckermann, T., Greving, H., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Kimmig, S. E., Hagen, R., et al. (2023) Scientific reasoning skills predict topic-specific knowledge after participation in a citizen science project on urban wildlife ecology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(9), pp. 1915–1941. DOI: 10.1002/tea.21835
- Bruckermann, T., Greving, H., Stillfried, M., Schumann, A., Brandt, M., and Harms, U. (2022) I’m fine with collecting data: Engagement profiles differ depending on scientific activities in an online community of a citizen science project. PLoS ONE, 17(10),
e0275785 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0275785 - Bruckermann, T., Straka, T. M., Stillfried, M., and Krell, M. (2021b) Context matters: Accounting for item features in the assessment of Citizen Scientists’ scientific reasoning skills. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), pp. 1–15. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.309
- Chang, Y., Lim, Y., and Stolterman, E. (2008) Personas: From theory to practices. In: Tollmar, K., and Jönsson, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th Nordic conference on human-computer interaction: Building bridges.
ACM . pp. 439–442. DOI: 10.1145/1463160.1463214 - Cooper, A. (1996) Goal-directed design. InContext Enterprises Incorporated.
- Cox, J., Oh, E. Y., Simmons, B., Lintott, C., Masters, K., Greenhill, A., Graham, G., et al. (2015) Defining and measuring success in online citizen science: A case study of Zooniverse projects. Computing in Science & Engineering, 17(4), pp. 28–41. DOI: 10.1109/MCSE.2015.65
- Crall, A. W., Jordan, R., Holfelder, K., Newman, G. J., Graham, J., and Waller, D. M. (2013) The impacts of an invasive species citizen science training program on participant attitudes, behavior, and science literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 22(6), pp. 745–764. DOI: 10.1177/0963662511434894
- Curtis, V. (2018) Online citizen science and the widening of academia. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-77664-4
- Dawson, E. (2018) Reimagining publics and (non) participation: Exploring exclusion from science communication through the experiences of low-income, minority ethnic groups. Public Understanding of Science, 27(7), pp. 772–786. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517750072
- de Filippo, D., Lascurain, M. L., Pandiella-Dominique, A., and Sanz-Casado, E. (2020) Scientometric analysis of research in energy efficiency and citizen science through projects and publications. Sustainability, 12(12), 5175. DOI: 10.3390/su12125175
- Dekramanjian, B., Bartumeus, F., Kampen, H., Palmer, J. R., Werner, D., and Pernat, N. (2023) Demographic and motivational differences between participants in analog and digital citizen science projects for monitoring mosquitoes. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 12384. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38656-y
- Domroese, M. C., and Johnson, E. A. (2017) Why watch bees? Motivations of citizen science volunteers in the Great Pollinator Project. Biological Conservation, 208, pp. 40–47. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.020
- Fischer, H., Cho, H., and Storksdieck, M. (2021) Going beyond hooked participants: The nibble-and-drop framework for classifying citizen science participation. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.350
- Füchslin, T. (2019) Science communication scholars use more and more segmentation analyses: Can we take them to the next level? Public Understanding of Science, 28(7), pp. 854–864. DOI: 10.1177/0963662519850086
- Füchslin, T., Schäfer, M. S., and Metag, J. (2019) Who wants to be a citizen scientist? Identifying the potential of citizen science and target segments in Switzerland. Public Understanding of Science, 28(6), pp. 652–668. DOI: 10.1177/0963662519852020
- Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., and Kimmerle, J. (2020) This is my project! The influence of involvement on psychological ownership and wildlife conservation. Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology, 1, 100001. DOI: 10.1016/j.cresp.2020.100001
- Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Hagen, R., Kimmig, S. E., et al. (2023) Attitudes toward engagement in citizen science increase self-related, ecology-related, and motivation-related outcomes in an urban wildlife project. BioScience, 73(3), pp. 206–219. DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biad003
- Greving, H.*, Bruckermann, T.*, Schumann, A., Straka, T. M., Lewanzik, D., Voigt-Heucke, S. L., Marggraf, L., et al. (2022) Improving attitudes and knowledge in a citizen science project about urban bat ecology. Ecology & Society, 27(2), Article 24. *shared first-authorship. DOI: 10.5751/ES-13272-270224
- Haklay, M. (2018)
Participatory citizen science . In: Hecker, S., Haklay, M., Bowser, A., Makuch, Z., Vogel, J., and Bonn, A. (eds.) Citizen Science: Innovation in Open Science, Society and Policy. London, UK: UCL Press. pp. 52–62. DOI: 10.14324/111.9781787352339 - IBM Corporation (2023) IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. Version 29.0.2.0. Armonk,, NY: IBM Corp.
- Jain, A. K., Murty, M. N., and Flynn, P. J. (1999) Data clustering: A review. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(3), pp. 264–323. DOI: 10.1145/331499.331504
- James, N. L. (2020) Identity and participation in Citizen Science. Doctoral dissertation, University of South Australia. 10.13140/RG.2.2.15691.41766
- Jönsson, M., Kasperowski, D., Coulson, S. J., Nilsson, J., Bína, P., Kullenberg, C., Hagen, N., et al. (2024) Inequality persists in a large citizen science programme despite increased participation through ICT innovations. Ambio, 53(1), pp. 126–137. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-023-01917-1
- Kaufman, L., and Rousseeuw, P. J. (1990) Finding groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. DOI: 10.1002/9780470316801
- Kirschke, S., Bennett, C., Ghazani, A. B., Franke, C., Kirschke, D., Lee, Y., Loghmani Khouzani, S. T., et al. (2022) Citizen science projects in freshwater monitoring. From individual design to clusters? Journal of Environmental Management, 309, 114714. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114714
- Lewenstein, B. (2016) Can we understand citizen science? Journal of Science Communication, 15(1), E. DOI: 10.22323/2.15010501
- Losi, L. (2023) Who engages with science, and how? An empirical typology of Europeans’ science engagement. Public Understanding of Science, 32(6), pp. 798–814. DOI: 10.1177/09636625231164340
- Mac Domhnaill, C., Lyons, S., and Nolan, A. (2020) The citizens in Citizen Science: Demographic, socioeconomic, and health characteristics of biodiversity recorders in Ireland. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 5(1), pp. 1–17. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.283
- Metag, J., and Schäfer, M. S. (2018) Audience segments in environmental and science communication: Recent findings and future perspectives. Environmental Communication, 12(8), pp. 995–1004. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2018.1521542
- Moczek, N., Hecker, S., and Voigt-Heucke, S. L. (2021) The known unknowns: What Citizen Science projects in Germany know about their volunteers—and what they don’t know. Sustainability, 13(20), 11553. DOI: 10.3390/su132011553
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (2018) Learning through Citizen Science: Enhancing opportunities by design. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. DOI: 10.17226/25183
- OECD, European Union, UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2015) ISCED 2011 Operational Manual: Guidelines for classifying national education programmes and related qualifications. Paris, France: OECD publishing.
- Paleco, C., García Peter, S., Salas Seoane, N., Kaufmann, J., and Argyri, P. (2021)
Inclusiveness and diversity in citizen science . In: Vohland, K., Land-Zandstra, A., Ceccaroni, L., Lemmens, R., Perelló, M., Ponti, M., Samson, R., et al. (eds.) The science of Citizen Science. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp. 261–282. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_14 - Pateman, R. M., Dyke, A., and West, S. E. (2021) The diversity of participants in environmental citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), pp. 1–16. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.369
- Phillips, T., Porticella, N., Constas, M., and Bonney, R. (2018) A framework for articulating and measuring individual learning outcomes from participation in citizen science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 3(2), pp. 1–19. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.126
- Phillips, T. B., Ballard H. L., Lewenstein, B. V., and Bonney, R. (2019) Engagement in science through citizen science: Moving beyond data collection. Science Education, 103(3), pp. 665–690. DOI: 10.1002/sce.21501
- Pocock, M. J. O., Tweddle, J. C., Savage, J., Robinson, L. D., and Roy, H. E. (2017) The diversity and evolution of ecological and environmental citizen science. PLoS ONE, 12(4),
e0172579 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0172579 - Ponciano, L., and Brasileiro, F. (2014) Finding volunteers’ engagement profiles in human computation for citizen science projects. Human Computation, 1(2), pp. 245–264. DOI: 10.15346/hc.v1i2.12
- Preece, J. (2016) Citizen Science: New research challenges for human–computer interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(8), pp. 585–612. DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2016.1194153
- R Core Team (2024) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at
https://www.r-project.org - Rosenblatt, C. J., Dayer, A. A., Duberstein, J. N., Phillips, T. B., Harshaw, H. W., Fulton, D. C., Cole, N. W., et al. (2022) Highly specialized recreationists contribute the most to the citizen science project eBird. Ornithological Applications, 124(2), pp. 1–16. DOI: 10.1093/ornithapp/duac008
- Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987) Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, pp. 53–65. DOI: 10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7
- Schäfer, M. S., Füchslin, T., Metag, J., Kristiansen, S., and Rauchfleisch, A. (2018) The different audiences of science communication: A segmentation analysis of the Swiss population’s perceptions of science and their information and media use patterns. Public Understanding of Science, 27(7), pp. 836–856. DOI: 10.1177/0963662517752886
- Scheufele, D. A. (2018) Beyond the choir? The need to understand multiple publics for science. Environmental Communication, 12(8), pp. 1123–1126. DOI: 10.1080/17524032.2018.1521543
- Schumann, A., Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., Kimmerle, J., Harms, U., and Brandt, M. (2024) We want you! Recruitment strategies for the success of a Citizen Science project on urban wildlife ecology. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, 1258813. DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2024.1258813
- Smith, P., King, O. N., Pennington, A., Tun, W., Basham, M., Jones, M. L., Collinson, L. M., et al. (2023) Online citizen science with the Zooniverse for analysis of biological volumetric data. Histochemistry and Cell Biology, 160(3), pp. 253–276. DOI: 10.1007/s00418-023-02204-6
- Strasser, B. J., Tancoigne, E., Baudry, J., Piguet, S., Spiers, H., Luis-Fernandez Marquez, J., Kasparian, J., et al. (2023) Quantifying online citizen science: Dynamics and demographics of public participation in science. PLoS ONE, 18(11),
e0293289 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293289 - Waugh, J. K., Lindsey, J. K., Stewart, M. Z., Winter, J. C., and Parrish, J. K. (2023) Demographics of public participation in science: A meta-analytic approach. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 8(1), pp. 1–14. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.610
- West, S., Dyke, A., and Pateman, R. (2021) Variations in the motivations of environmental citizen scientists. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 6(1), pp. 1–18. DOI: 10.5334/cstp.370
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.910 | Journal eISSN: 2057-4991
Language: English
Page range: 12 - 12
Submitted on: Sep 24, 2025
Accepted on: Apr 29, 2026
Published on: May 15, 2026
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
© 2026 Hannah Greving, Till Bruckermann, Robert Hagen, Anke Schumann, Konstantin Börner, Sophia E. Kimmig, Daniel Lewanzik, Julia Lorenz, Lara Marggraf, Milena Stillfried, Tanja M. Straka, Silke Voigt-Heucke, Christian C. Voigt, Miriam Brandt, Ute Harms, Joachim Kimmerle, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.