SCIENCE VOLUNTEERING ECOSYSTEM: FIVE CROWDSOURCING PARADIGMS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25806/fm-2321Статья поступила в редакцию: 30.10.2025
Статья принята к публикации: 03.12.2025
Статья опубликована: 09.12.2025
Keywords:
гражданская наука, научное волонтёрство, проекты научного волонтёрства, краудсорсинг, общественность, толпа, научные волонтёры, волонтёры.Abstract
In recent years, there has been an increase in the popularity of Citizen Science projects in the world, which have received the definition of "Scientific Volunteering" in the Russian Federation. This growth is due to the fact that scientists, educators and educational organizations are aware of the new opportunities for solving research problems that open up when conducting scientific research with the involvement of the public. Understanding the opportunities provided by involving the public in scientific volunteering projects is a significant question that needs to be answered in the implementation of scientific volunteering projects. It should be noted that at present there are very few conceptual studies aimed at studying the functional capabilities of the public, making a significant contribution to the solution of research problems. In order to fill the knowledge gap regarding the functionality of public engagement in science volunteering projects, the article presents a conceptual framework for five crowdsourcing paradigms. The article also presents tools that contribute to understanding how public participation in science volunteer projects can contribute to solving research problems. The article contributes to the scientific literature on volunteering, scientific volunteering, crowdsourcing. The materials presented in the article contribute to the development of research in the field of crowdsourcing in scientific volunteering.
Информация о публикации
Финансирование: Исследование выполнено без привлечения внешнего финансирования, если иное не указано авторами.
Вклад авторов: Все авторы внесли существенный вклад в подготовку статьи, ознакомились с окончательной версией рукописи и одобрили ее к публикации.
Конфликт интересов: Авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов, если иное не указано в публикации.
Правообладатель: Издательский дом «Академический».
Условия использования. Статьи текущего года распространяются по подписке на журнал «Финансовый менеджмент». Все права защищены. Полная версия статьи доступна на сайте Научной электронной библиотеки eLIBRARY.RU www.elibrary.ru/contents.asp?titleid=9552 . Материалы предыдущих лет распространяются по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) . Метаданные всех статей распространяются по открытой лицензии и могут свободно использоваться в информационных, научных и библиографических целях.
Машиночитаемый файл метаданных: JATS XML
References
Eitzel M., Cappadonna J., Santos-Lang C., Duerr R., West S.E., Virapongse A., Kyba C., Bowser A., Cooper C., Sforzi A. Citizen science terminology matters: exploring key terms // Citizen Science: Theory and Practice. 2017. № 2. Р. 1-20.
Franzoni C., Poetz M., Sauermann H. Crowds, citizens, and science: a multi-dimensional framework and agenda for future research // Industry and Innovation. 2022. Vol. 29. № 2. Р. 1-34.
Haklay M.M., Doorler D., Heigl F., Manzoni M., Hecker S., Vohland K., Vohland K., Land-Zandstra A., Ceccaroni L., Lemmens R., Perello J., Ponti M., Samson R., Wagenknecht K. What is citizen science? The challenges of definition // The Science of Citizen Science. Springer. 2021. P. 13-33.
Beck S., Brasseur T.M., Poetz M., Sauermann H. Crowdsourcing research questions in science // Research Policy. 2022. Vol. 51. № 4. е.104491. DOI: 10.1016/j. respol.2022.104491.
Afuah A., Tucci C.L. Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search // Academy of Management Review. 2012. № 37. Р. 355-375.
Guinan E., Boudreau K.J., Lakhani K.R., Experiments in open innovation at Harvard medical school // MIT Sloan Management Review. 2013. № 54. Р. 45-52.
Piezunka H., Dahlander L. Distant search, narrow attention: how crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing // Academy of Management Journa. 2015. № 58. Р. 856-880.
Tucci C.L., Afuah A., Viscusi G. Creating and Capturing Value Through Crowdsourcing // Oxford University Press, New York, USA. 2018. Р. 38.
Lyons E., Zhang L. Trade-offs in motivating volunteer effort: Experimental evidence on voluntary contributions to science. PloS ONE, 2019. № 14. e.0224946. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224946.
Theobald E.J., Ettinger A.K., Burgess H.K., Debey L.B., Schmidt N.R., Froehlich H.E., Wagner C., Hillerislambers J., Tewksbury J., Harsch M. Global change and local solutions: Tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research // Biological Conservation. 2015. № 181. Р. 236-244. DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.10.021.
Franzoni C., Sauermann H. Crowd science: The organization of scientific research in open collaborative projects // Research Policy. 2014. Vol. 43. № 1. Р.1-20.
Sauermann H., Franzoni, C. 2015. Crowd science user contribution patterns and their implications // Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015. Vol. 112. № 3. Р. 679-684.
Singh J., Fleming L. Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: myth or reality? // Management Science. 2010. № 56. Р. 41-56.
Lifshitz-Assaf H. Dismantling knowledge boundaries at NASA: the critical role of professional identity in open innovation // Administrative Science Quarterly. 2018. № 63. Р. 746-782.
Von Hippel E., Von Krogh G. Crossroads - Identifying viable “need solution pairs”: Problem solving without problem formulation // Organization Science. 2016. Vol. 27. № 1. Р. 207-21.
Poetz M. K., Schreier M. The value of crowdsourcing: Can users really compete with professionals in generating new product ideas? // Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2012. Vol. 29. № 2. Р. 245-256.
Beck S., Brehm R., Poetz M, Suess-Reyes J. Increasing the depth of crowd involvement: Decision making and co-creation challenges in science. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Annual Conference, 2023. Р. 40.
Majchrzak A., Malhotra A., Unleashing the Crowd: Collaborative Solutions to Wicked Business and Societal Problems. Springer Nature, 2019. Р. 331.
Sauermann H., Vohland K., Antoniou V., Balazs B., Gobel C., Karatzas K., Mooney P., Perello J., Ponti M., Samson R. Citizen science and sustainability transitions // Research Policy. 2020. № 49. е.103978.
Muller-Trede J., Choshen-Hillel S., Barneron M., Yaniv I. The wisdom of crowds in matters of taste // Management Science. 2018. Vol. 64. № 4. Р. 1779-1803.
