Assessing the performance of volunteers in monitoring streams.

285 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Using eDNA to develop a national citizen science-based monitoring programme for the great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) (2015, background): “Groups which are more taxonomically challenging can often only be identified at higher taxonomic levels which, although potentially correlated with metrics of species richness or rarity (Fore et al., 2001), does substantially limit the use of such data for species based conservation programmes.”
A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities (2011, background): “1997), and some have found through validation and calibration that volunteers collect data comparable to professional researchers (with limitations) (Newman et al. 2003; Foster-Smith and Evans 2003; Fore et al. 2001).”
Marine invasive species: validation of citizen science and implications for national monitoring networks (2007, background): “However, all groups did record the species and gender of the crabs, which is extremely useful information for early detection and helps to fill in the gaps in current monitoring by professionals (Fore et al. 2001).”