Public Libraries Can Be Open Science Laboratories for Citizen Science Projects
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A Review of: Cigarini, A., Bonhoure, I., Vicens, J., & Perelló, J. (2021). Public libraries embrace citizen science: Strengths and challenges. Library & Information Science Research, 43(2), 101090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2021.101090Objective – The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential of libraries supporting citizen scientist (CS) projects. Design – Mixed methods program evaluation study. Setting – 24 public libraries in Barcelona, Spain. Subjects – Public librarians and library users. Methods – It is a mixed methods and mixed population study done in several phases. The first phase involved training 30 librarians how to conduct a citizen science project. They were given a pre and post survey about their perceptions of citizen science and comfort-level in conducting a project. The second phase involved a project run by the now-trained librarians with library user participation. At this phase a questionnaire was given to the users at the start and end of the project. Finally, a focus group of librarians was asked about their project. The responses were evaluated through thematic analysis. Seven libraries participated in the focus groups. Main Results – During the first phase of the study, the survey found the librarians were pessimistic about user participation in a citizen science project, both at the beginning (75%) and at the end (79%) of the session. Though they felt confident in discussing citizen science (100%) and had high satisfaction in the training (70%), only 42% felt confident to conduct a project on their own. The second phase involved the users, 94% of whom had never participated in a CS project. At the end, 70% of users said the project positively changed their perceptions of the library and 70% were satisfied with the experiment. During the focus groups, librarians said the project brought new users into the library and had the potential to build more relationships among participants and with the community. Major challenges discussed were user commitment to the project and the workload required by librarians, however they all answered positively when asked about continuing with CS projects. Conclusion – This study showed that citizen science projects can be successfully implemented in public libraries. Public libraries are facing challenges caused by societal change, the rise of open science, and more transparent and novel democratic ways of knowledge production. Updating public library infrastructure would be needed to support these projects more fully. This may involve building partnerships and developing new guidelines. There is potential for public libraries to be leaders and innovators in citizen science.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,020 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,030 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,191 | 0,102 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».