Inclusive citizen science, an emerging field, has seen extensive research. Prior studies primarily concentrated on creating theoretical models and practical strategies for diversifying citizen science (CS) projects. These studies relied on ethical frameworks or post-project empirical observations. Few examined active participants' socio-demographic and behavioral data. Notably, none, to our knowledge, explored prospective citizen scientists' traits as intrinsic factors to enhance diversity and engagement in CS. This paper presents a new inclusive CS engagement model based on quantitative analysis of surveys administered to 540 participants of the dedicated free informal education MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) 'Your Right to Privacy Online' from eight countries in the EU funded project, CSI-COP (Citizen Scientists Investigating Cookies and App GDPR compliance). The surveys were filled out just after completing the training stage and before joining the project as active CSs. Out of the 540 participants who completed the surveys analyzed in this study, only 170 (32%) individuals actively participated as CSs in the project. Therefore, the study attempted to understand what characterizes these participants compared to those who decided to refrain from joining the project after the training stage. The study employed descriptive analysis and advanced statistical tests to explore the correlations among different research variables. The findings revealed several important relationships and predictors for becoming a citizen scientist based on the surveys analysis, such as age, gender, culture, education, Internet accessibility and apps usage, as well as the satisfaction with the MOOC, the mode of training and initial intentions for becoming a CS. These findings lead to the development of the empirical model for inclusive engagement in CS and enhance the understanding of the internal factors that influence individuals' intention and actual participation as CSs. The devised model offers valuable insights and key implications for future CS initiatives. It emphasizes the necessity of targeted recruitment strategies, focusing on underrepresented groups and overcoming accessibility barriers. Positive learning experiences, especially through MOOCs, are crucial; enhancing training programs and making educational materials accessible and culturally diverse can boost participant motivation. Acknowledging varying technological proficiency and providing necessary resources enhances active engagement. Addressing the intention-engagement gap is vital; understanding underlying factors and creating supportive environments can transform intentions into active involvement. Embracing cultural diversity through language-specific strategies ensures an inclusive environment for effective contributions.

Biomimetics and Intelligent Systems Group University of Oulu Oulu Finland

Department of Biomedical Engineering and Assistive Technology Czech Institute of Informatics Robotics and Cybernetics The Czech Technical University Prague Prague Czech Republic

Department of Computational Science and Mathematical Modelling Coventry University Coventry United Kingdom

Department of Digital Learning Technologies The Israel Academic College in Ramat Gan Raanana Israel

Department of Information Science Bar Ilan University Ramat Gan Israel

Department of Science and Innovation Management Academy of Music Theatre and Fine Arts Chisinau Republic of Moldova

Electrical and Computer Engineering Department University of Patras Patras Greece

Immer Besser GmbH and SKS Knowledge Services Munich Germany

Independent Researcher Hungary

Philosophy Department Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Barcelona Spain

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Irga P. J., Barker K., & Torpy F. R. (2018). Conservation mycology in Australia and the potential role of citizen science. PubMed DOI

Vohland K., Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perelló J., Ponti M., et al. (2021) The Science of Citizen Science Evolves. Chapter 1 in Vohland K, Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perelló J., Ponti M., Samson R., & Wagenknecht K. (eds.) DOI

Liebenberg L., Steventon J., Brahman N., Benadie K., Minye J., & Langwane H.K. (2017) ‘Smartphone iIcon user interface design for non-literate trackers and its implications for an inclusive citizen science’,

Paleco C., García Peter S., Salas Seoane N., Kaufmann J., & Argyri P. (2021) ‘Inclusiveness and diversity in citizen science’, Chapter 14 in Vohland K, Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perelló J., Ponti M., Samson R., & Wagenknecht K. (eds.) DOI

Caltová P., Tymr F., Kulhavá Z. & Tláskal V. (2020) ‘Citizen science: its importance and motivation of participants in context of the City Nature Challenge project’, DOI

Korkala, S. (2019) ‘Tattis: A case study of participants in the citizen science project Mushroom Atlas’. Masters’ Thesis, Faculty of Humanities, Information Studies, University of Oulu (in Finnish). 17 Oct.

Constant N. L., & Hughes J. (2023) ‘Diversifying citizen science through the inclusion of young people’,

Groot B., & Abma T. (2022) ‘Ethics framework for citizen science and public and patient participation in research’, PubMed PMC

Fiske A., Prainsack B., & Buyx A. (2019) ‘Meeting the needs of underserved populations: setting the agenda for more inclusive citizen science of medicine’, PubMed DOI PMC

Palmroth M., Grandin M., Helin M., Koski P., Oksanen A., Glad M.A., et al. (2020) ‘Citizen scientists discover a new auroral form: Dunes provide insight into the upper atmosphere’, DOI

Moustard F., Haklay M., Lewis J., Albert A., Moreu M., Chiaravalloti R., et al. (2021) ‘Using Sapelli in the field: methods and data for an inclusive citizen science’,

Parrish J. K., Jones T., Burgess H. K., He Y., Fortson L., & Cavalier D. (2019) ‘Hoping for optimality or designing for inclusion: Persistence, learning, and the social network of citizen science’, PubMed DOI PMC

Puhan M. A., Steinemann N., Kamm C.P., Müller S., Kuhle J., Kurmann R., et al. (2018) ‘A digitally facilitated citizen-science driven approach accelerates participant recruitment and increases study population diversity’, PubMed DOI

Moczek N., Hecker S., & Voigt-Heucke S.L. (2021) ‘The known unknowns: what citizen science projects in Germany know about their volunteers, and what they don’t know’,

Golumbic Y.N., Fishbain B. & Baram-Tsabari A. (2019) ‘User centered design of a citizen science air-quality monitoring project’, DOI

Soleri D., Long J.W., Ramirez-Andreotta M., & Eitemiller R.D. (2016) ‘Finding pathways to more equitable and meaningful public-scientist partnerships’, DOI

Stepankova O., Shah H., Özdemir D., Pierce R. L., Gialelis Y., Hinsenkamp M., et al. (2020). CSI-COP framework for engaging citizen scientists. ‏ Available at: https://oulurepo.oulu.fi/handle/10024/29068.

Shah H. and Pocs M. (2023). Data Management Plan 3. DOI

Shah H., Giaelis Y., Konstantinopoulos I., Lantavou K., Karakonstanti A., Rigler D., et al. (2023). Taxonomy of Digital Cookies and Online Trackers. DOI

Sathian B., Asim M., Banerjee I., Pizarro A. B., Roy B., Van Teijlingen E. R., et al. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 on clinical trials and clinical research: a systematic review. PubMed DOI PMC

ECSA European Citizen Science Association (2015) Ten principles of citizen science. Berlin. doi: http%3A//doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XPR2N

Cooper C.B., Hawn C.L., Larson L.R., Parrish J.K., Bowser G., Cavalier D., et al. (2021) ‘Inclusion in citizen science: The conundrum of rebranding’,

Rasmussen L. M., & Cooper C. (2019) ‘Citizen science ethics’,

Spasiano A., Grimaldi S., Braccini A.M., & Nardi F. (2021) ‘Towards a transdisciplinary theoretical framework of citizen science: results from a meta-review analysis’,

Liebenberg L., Ao A., Lombard M., Shermer M. Xhukwe U., Biesele M., et al. (2021) ‘Tracking science: An alternative for those excluded by citizen science’,

Liberatore A., Bowkett E., MacLeod C. J., Spurr E., & Longnecker N. (2018) ‘Social media as a platform for a citizen science community of practice’,

Constant Natasha Louise, and Joelene Hughes. "Diversifying citizen science through the inclusion of young people."

Diblíková L., Pipek P., Petrusek A., Svoboda J., Bílková J., Vermouzek Z., et al. (2018) ‘Detailed large‐scale mapping of geographical variation of Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella song dialects in a citizen science project’, DOI

Sorensen A.E., Jordan R.C., LaDeau S.L., Biehler D., Wilson S., Pitas J.H., et al. (2019) ‘Reflecting on efforts to design an inclusive citizen science project in West Baltimore’, DOI

Rüfenacht S., Woods T., Agnello G., Gold M., Hummer P., Land-Zandstra A., et al. (2021) ‘Communication and dissemination in citizen science’, Chapter 24 in Vohland K, Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perelló J., Ponti M., Samson., & Wagenknecht K. (eds.) DOI

Palacin V., Gilbert S., Orchard S., Eaton A., Ferrario M. A., & Happonen A. (2020) ‘Drivers of participation in digital citizen science: Case Studies on Järviwiki and Safecast’,

Korkala, Sami. "Tattis!: tapaustutkimus kansalaistiedehanke sieniatlakseen osallistuneista." Master’s thesis, S. Korkala, 2019.

Allf B.C., Cooper C.B., Larson L.R., Dunn R.R., Futch S.E., Sharova M., et al. (2022) ‘Citizen science as an ecosystem of engagement: Implications for learning and broadening participation’, PubMed DOI PMC

TCV (2014) ‘Engaging volunteers–Guide to engaging volunteers in citizen science projects’, The Conservation Volunteers. Available at: https://www.tcv.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/EngagingVolunteersCitizenScience.pdf (Last accessed 23 June 2023).

Sprinks J., Houghton R., Bamford S., & Morley J.G. (2017) ‘Planet Four: Craters—Optimizing task workflow to improve volunteer engagement and crater counting performance’, Meteoritics & Planetary Science 54(6):1325–1346. doi: 10.1111/maps.13277 DOI

Golumbic Y.N., Fishbain B. & Baram-Tsabari A. (2020) ‘Science literacy in action: understanding scientific data presented in a citizen science platform by non-expert adults’, DOI

Komai, O., Peer, G. & Peer, I. (2019) ‘The motivation for participation in butterfly monitoring program in Israel’, Report, website of Butterfly monitoring project (in Hebrew). Available at: https://20e3279b-1df2-4b2b-89c3-66056df750fc.filesusr.com/ugd/6b7410_18894d2137e34d5ca155f1ecdb9c80fb.pdf (Last accessed 23 June 2023).

Hinsenkamp M., Rigler D., Stepankova O., Shah H., Gialelis Y., Pierce R., et al. (2020). Guidelines for diverse citizen science recruitment. Available at: https://oulurepo.oulu.fi/handle/10024/29067.

Ignat T., Stepankova O., Shah H., Celentano U., Zhitormsky-Geffet M., Gialelis Y., et al. (2020). Public report on current methods in CS Engagement CSI-COP EU H2020 project (version 4). (Deliverable D2.1). DOI

CSI-COP. (2021). Your Right to Privacy Online. CSI-COP free informal education course. CSI-COP. https://csi-cop.eu/informal-education-mooc/.

Rigler D., Hinsenkamp M., Shah H. & Winter J. (2023). CSI-COP Citizen Scientists Age, Gender, Socio-Economic and Geographical (AGSEG) Distribution Report. DOI

Cohen J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203771587 DOI

Fishbein M., & Ajzen I. (1977). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.

Hadad S., & Aharony N. (2022). Factors influencing researchers to publish in open-access: Is it a self-decision or a self-reinforcing cycle?. DOI

Venkatesh V., Morris M. G., Davis G. B., and Davis F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

Hitchcock C., Vance-Chalcraft H., & Aristeidou M. (2021) ‘Citizen science in higher education’,

Giardullo P., Arias R., Leguina L., & Magalhães J. (2022) ‘Responsible and inclusive citizen science: comparing initiatives and assessing impacts’,

Weinberger M., Zhitomirsky-Geffet M. & Bouhnik D. (2017). Sex differences in attitudes towards online privacy and anonymity among Israeli students with different technical backgrounds.