The use and utility of science in society is often influenced by the structure, legitimacy, and efficacy of the scientific research process. Public participation in scientific research (PPSR) is a growing field of practice aimed at enhancing both public knowledge and understanding of science (education outreach) and the efficacy and responsiveness of scientific research, practice, and policy (participatory engagement). However, PPSR objectives focused on “education outreach” and “participatory engagement” have each emerged from diverse theoretical traditions that maintain distinct indicators of success used for program development and evaluation. Although areas of intersection and overlap among these two traditions exist in theory and practice, a set of comprehensive standards has yet to coalesce that supports the key principles of both traditions in an assimilated fashion. To fill this void, a comprehensive indicators framework is proposed with the goal of promoting a more integrative and synergistic PPSR program development and assessment process.
AbelsonJPierre-GerlierFEylesJSmithPMartinEFrancois-PierreG (2003) Deliberations about deliberative methods: Issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science & Medicine57: 239–251.
2.
BauerMAllumNMillerS (2007) What can we learn from 25 years of PUS survey research? Liberating and expanding the agenda. Public Understanding of Science16: 79–95.
3.
BeierleTC (1999) Using social goals to evaluate public participation in environmental decisions. Policy Studies Review16(3–4): 75–103.
4.
BellPLewensteinBVShouseAWFederMA (eds) (2009) Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, DC: National Research Council of the National Academies.
5.
BesleyJC (2010) Public engagement and the impact of fairness perceptions on decision favorability and acceptance. Science Communication32(2): 256–280.
6.
BesleyJCMcComasKA (2005) Framing justice: Using the concept of procedural justice to advance political communication research. Communication Theory15: 414–436.
7.
BiegelbauerPHansenJ (2011) Democratic theory and citizen participation: Democracy models in the evaluation of public participation in science and technology. Science and Public Policy38(8): 589–597.
8.
BlackstockKKellyGHorseyBL (2007) Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability. Ecological Economics60: 726–742.
9.
BonneyR (2004) Understanding the process of research. In: ChittendenDFarmeloGLewensteinB (eds) Creating Connections: Museums and Public Understanding of Current Research. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, pp. 199–210.
10.
BonneyR (2007) Citizen science at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology. In: YagerREFalkJH (eds) Exemplary Science in Informal Education Settings: Standards-based Success Stories. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press, pp. 213–230.
11.
BonneyRDhondtA (1997) FeederWatch: An example of a student–scientist partnership. In: CohenKC (ed.) Internet Links for Science Education: Student–Scientist Partnerships. New York, NY: Plenum Press, pp. 31–53.
12.
BonneyRBallardHJordanRMcCallieEPhillipsTShirkJWildermanCC (2009a) Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).
13.
BonneyRCooperCDickinsonJKellingSPhillipsT (2009b) Citizen science: A developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience59(11): 977–984.
14.
BraschlerBMahoodKKarenyiNGastonKChownS (2010) Realizing a synergy between research and education: How participation in ant monitoring helps raise biodiversity awareness in a resource-poor country. Journal of Insect Conservation14: 19–30.
15.
BrewerC (2002) Outreach and partnership programs for conservation education where endangered species conservation and research occur. Conservation Biology16(1): 4–6.
16.
CampbellLVainio-MattilaA (2003) Participatory development and community-based conservation: Opportunities missed for lessons learned?Human Ecology31(3): 417–437.
17.
ConradCHilcheyK (2011) A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: Issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring & Assessment176: 273–291.
18.
CouvetDJiguetFJulliardRLevrelHTeyssedreA (2008) Enhancing citizen contributions to biodiversity science and public policy. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews33(1): 95–103.
19.
DanielsenFBurgessNBalmfordA (2005) Monitoring matters: Examining the potential of locally-based approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation14(11): 2507–2542.
20.
DaviesS (2008) Constructing communication: Talking to scientists about talking to the public. Science Communication29(4): 413–434.
21.
Delli CarpiniMLomax CookFJacobsL (2004) Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science7: 315–344.
22.
DevictorVWhittakerRBeltrameC (2010) Beyond scarcity: Citizen science programmes as useful tools for conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions16: 354–362.
23.
DickinsonJZuckerbergBBonterD (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics41: 149–172.
24.
DunlapRVan LiereK (2008) The “new environmental paradigm”. Journal of Environmental Education40(1): 19–28.
25.
EvansCAbramsEReitsmaRRouxKSalmonsenLMarraP (2005) The Neighborhood Nestwatch program: Participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conservation Biology19(3): 589–594.
26.
Fernandez-GimenezMBallardHSturtevantV (2008) Adaptive management and social learning in collaborative and community-based monitoring: A study of five community-based forestry organizations in the western USA. Ecology and Society13(2).
27.
FriedmanA (ed.) (2008) Framework for Evaluating Impacts of Informal Science Education Projects. Report from a National Science Foundation Workshop. The National Science Foundation, Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL).
28.
GerhardsJSchaferM (2009) Two normative models of science in the public sphere: Human genome sequencing in German and US mass media. Public Understanding of Science18: 437–451.
29.
GibbonsM (1999) Science’s new social contract with society. Nature402: C81–C84.
30.
GreenwoodJ (2007) Citizens, science and bird conservation. Journal of Ornithology148: S77–S124.
31.
HenryADietzT (2012) Understanding environmental cognition. Organization and Environment25(3): 238–258.
32.
Horlick-JonesTRoweGWallsJ (2007) Citizen engagement processes as information systems: The role of knowledge and the concept of translation quality. Public Understanding of Science16: 259–278.
33.
IrwinAWynneB (1996) Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34.
KountoupesDOberhauserK (2008) Citizen science and youth audiences: Educational outcomes of the Monarch Larva Monitoring Project. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship1(1): 10–20.
35.
KrasnyMBonneyR (2005) Environmental education through citizen science and participatory action research. In: JohnsonEAMappinMJ (eds) Environmental Education and Advocacy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 292–319.
36.
KurianPWrightJ (2012) Science, governance, and public participation: An analysis of decision-making on genetic modification in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Public Understanding of Science21(4): 447–464.
37.
LawrenceA (2006) “No personal motive?” Volunteers, biodiversity and the false dichotomies of participation. Ethics, Place and Environment9(3): 279–298.
38.
LeeTQuinnMDukeD (2006) Citizen, science, highways, and wildlife: Using a web-based GIS to engage citizens in collecting wildlife information. Ecology and Society11(1): 11.
39.
LewensteinB (1992) The meaning of “public understanding of science” in the United States after World War II. Public Understanding of Science1: 45–68.
40.
LewensteinBBonneyR (2004) Different ways of looking at public understanding of research. In: ChittendenDFarmeloGLewensteinB (eds) Creating Connections: Museums and Public Understanding of Current Research. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press, pp. 63–71.
41.
LuhmannN (1988) Familiarity, confidence, trust: Problems and alternatives. In: GambettaD (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell, pp. 94–107.
42.
McCallieEBellLLohwaterTFalkJHLehrJLLewensteinBVNeedhamCWieheB (2009) Many Experts, Many Audiences: Public Engagement with Science and Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, DC: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).
43.
MejlgaardNStaresS (2010) Participation and competence as joint components in a cross-national analysis of scientific citizenship. Public Understanding of Science19(5): 545–561.
44.
National Research Council (NRC), Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments, BellPLewensteinBShouseAFederM (eds) (2009) Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Board of Science Education, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
45.
National Science Board (NSB) (2012) Science and Engineering Indicators 2012. National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. Arlington, VA. Available at: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/
46.
OverdevestCOrrCStepenuckK (2004) Volunteer stream monitoring and local participation in natural resource issues. Human Ecology Review11(2): 177–185.
47.
PatemanC (1970) Participation and Democratic Theory. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
48.
PattonM (1997) Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice18: 147–163.
49.
PowellMColinM (2008) Meaningful citizen engagement in science and technology: What would it really take?Science Communication30(1): 126–136.
50.
PowellMKleinmanDL (2008) Building citizen capacities for participation in technoscientific decision making: The democratic virtues of the consensus conference model. Public Understanding of Science17: 329–348.
51.
RaddickJBraceyGCarneyKGyukGBorneKWallinJJacobyS (2009) Citizen science: Status and research directions for the coming decade. Astro2010: The Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey, Position Papers, no. 46. NASA Astrophysics Data System.
52.
RennOWeblerTWiedemannP (1995) Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
53.
RothWLeeS (2002) Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science11: 33–56.
54.
RoweGFrewerLJ (2000) Public participation methods: A framework for evaluation. Science, Technology, & Human Values25(1): 3–29.
55.
RoweGFrewerLJ (2004) Evaluating public participation exercises: A research agenda. Science, Technology, & Human Values29(4): 512–556.
56.
SchmellerDHenryPJulliardRGruberBClobertJDziockF. (2009) Advantages of volunteer-based biodiversity monitoring in Europe. Conservation Biology23(2): 307–316.
57.
ShirkJLBallardHLWildermanCCPhillipsTWigginsAJordanR. (2012) Public participation in scientific research: A framework for deliberate design. Ecology and Society17(2): 29.
58.
SiegristMGutscherHEarleT (2005) Perception of risk: The influence of general trust, and general confidence. Journal of Risk Research8(2): 145–156.
59.
SilvertownJ (2009) A new dawn for citizen science. Trends in Ecology and Evolution24(9): 467–470.
60.
SturgisPAllumN (2004) Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science13: 55–74.
61.
SullivanBWoodCIliffMBonneyRFinkDKellingS (2009) eBird: A citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences. Biological Conservation142: 2282–2292.
62.
TalwarSWiekARobinsonJ (2011) User engagement in sustainability research. Science and Public Policy38(5): 379–390.
63.
TliliADawsonE (2010) Mediating science and society in the EU and UK: From information transmission to deliberative democracy?Minerva48: 429–461.
64.
TrumbullDBonneyRBascomDCabralA (2000) Thinking scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project. Science Education84: 265–275.
WeblerT (1995) “Right” discourse in citizen participation: An evaluative yardstick. In: RennOMWeblerTWiedemannP (eds) Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 35–86.
67.
WildermanCBarronAImgrundL (2004) Top down or bottom up? ALLARM’s experience with two operational models for community science. Proceedings of the 4th National Monitoring Conference. Chattanooga: National Water Quality Monitoring Council.
68.
WintleBRungeMBekesseyS (2010) Allocating monitoring effort in the face of unknown unknowns. Ecology Letters13: 1325–1337.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
