Summary

Public participation in scientific research (PPSR) programs, also known as citizen or community science programs, rely on public engagement with scientists and the scientific process. PPSR scholars and practitioners alike evaluate the outcomes of programs, often highlighting elements such as the reliability and accuracy of layperson-collected data and the acquisition of science literacy. Engaging in community-oriented science also leads to social–emotional outcomes, such as empowerment and empowerment-related characteristics, including social capital and self-efficacy.

While much of PPSR falls under the “contributory” model, in which non-scientists collect data but have little role in designing data collection, interpreting, or disseminating the data, PPSR programs are more likely to be empowering if they involve community members more extensively in other aspects of the monitoring process. This extensive involvement could include data collection protocol design, recruiting participants, and assisting with data analysis, interpretation, and dissemination.

PPSR scholarship often touts empowerment as an outcome, yet few scholars adequately define empowerment or provide clear explanations of how they account for or measure empowerment as a result of their efforts. Researchers across disciplines conceptualize the term “empowerment” in different ways and at different scales, from individual and psychological empowerment, to community-level and political or economic empowerment. Self-efficacy, or the belief that one can accomplish something, and social capital are both elements of empowerment and feature in PPSR scholarship as desired outcomes.

PPSR programs can also be disempowering, particularly if local communities feel overburdened by program costs or are excluded from the program. Lack of data privacy or sovereignty and the use of technologies such as data loggers that render data collection processes opaque may also hinder empowerment.

Even as research about PPSR has flourished since the turn of the 21st century, some challenges and questions remain. Significant PPSR research has been undertaken to demonstrate the quality of citizen-collected data, but not nearly as much attention is paid to the quality of data collected about those participants and what they have taken away from the experience. An adjacent challenge is a tendency of PPSR programs themselves to attract White and affluent participants, which means that citizen data on air quality, for example, may include major gaps of knowledge in those locations that might need information about air quality the most.

There is a pressing need for greater theoretical and methodological rigor in PPSR studies to mitigate bias and ensure the integrity of findings, as there is a critical gap in research examining the potential negative impacts of citizen science. Moving forward, addressing these challenges and gaps in knowledge requires collaborative efforts among researchers and practitioners.