Measuring epistemic success of a biodiversity citizen science program: A citation study

success of biodiversity citizen science projects. First, projects exhibiting a relatively large tem- poral and spatial extent appear to have a (relatively) high scientific impact. Here, it would be relevant to compare the impact of Vigie-Nature with that of non-participative large-scale, long-term networks of observatories of biodiversity, such as the countryside survey ([36], https://countrysidesurvey.org.uk/) in UK or the worldwide CTFS-forestgeo ([37], https:// forestgeo.si.edu/) project. Second, the management structure of the projects might also be a central determinant of their epistemic success. Vigie-Nature is characterized by a very central- ized structure, with a few number of well-identified researchers managing a vast network of observatories and a vast amount of collected data. These managers are assisted locally by natu- ralist associations which recruit participants and animate the programs by organizing meetings and by sending newsletters. This structure might enhance the scientific impact of the projects because data are collected, controlled and used by a stable, dedicated team of researchers. These ones got a good expertise in producing peer-reviewed papers on the basis of participa- tive data collection. Apart from this specific structure of the citizen science programs, the con- stitution of the research team might also play a role in itself, notably through its professional quality, its notoriety, its insertion within the research networks, etc. To have a more complete

view of the factors influencing epistemic success of biodiversity citizen science project, it would then be necessary to address a range of comparisons with other similar participative projects in ecology—such as, for instance, the eBird program ([38], https://ebird.org/home) from Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology. We also should keep in mind that scientific impact cannot be the only determinant of what should count as ‘‘good practices” of participation. The ethical issue of the visibility of the par- ticipants should also be considered seriously. As noted by [39], various citizen science pro- grams in environmental sciences still make contributing citizens invisible in scientific productions, in spite of advances in securing data quality. More generally, this lack of recogni- tion of volunteer contributors is a well-recognized ethical problem [40, 41]. Yet, Vigie-Nature productions do not explicitly include recognition of citizen contributions. In addition, this lack of recognition also questions the influence of citizens’ invisibility on the diffusion of the corresponding scientific results [39]. As many scientists manifest a lack of trust as respects to citizen science data and results [42], the fact that participants are made invisible in Vigie- Nature productions might contribute to their epistemic impact. This would be a crucial point to consider in the future of this citizen science program. Some inspiring propositions have been made in literature regarding the online sharing of biodiversity data. For instance, [43]

insist on the importance of recognizing the work of data publishers when citing datasets in sci- entific papers. This suggestion points to an explicit reference to Vigie-Nature participatory datasets within the Vigie-Nature scientific publications. Moreover, Vigie-Nature data could be shared online through international biodiversity data networks, such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility [44]. This would give a visibility to this specific type of data, and could increase the epistemic trust placed by researchers in citizen science. Supporting information S1 Fig. Comparison of the original sample citation profile (red curve) and the computed one (blue curve). The blue curve was obtained by applying the approximation method we use in our study. The sample size is n = 100 papers. (TIF) S2 Fig. Evaluation of the robustness of our citation rate calculation. Average relative error generated by our method of calculation of the yearly citation rate as a function of the sample size. (TIF) PLOS ONE A citation study of a biodiversity citizen science program PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0258350 October 11, 2021 10 / 13