What makes a citizen scientist? – From definition to inclusion

Citizen science is a steadily strengthening part of open and responsible science. In it, “ordinary” people without formal training as a professional researcher voluntarily conduct research and participate in the research process. Citizen science can also be seen as a promising counterforce to the spread and dissemination of disinformation and misinformation. Trust in research findings is enhanced when people can participate in producing them and gain insight into the research process from within. Through the participants, this trust also extends to their communities. 

Citizen science activities cut across disciplinary boundaries. Nevertheless, academic structures and disciplinary borders make defining citizen science challenging (Haklay et al. 2021). A variety of parallel terms are used to describe citizen science, each with slightly different emphases. Moreover, the terminology continues to evolve alongside practices. In this text, the term citizen science is used, but alternatives such as co-research, participatory science, or crowdsourcing may also be appropriate. The term community science has also gained more international visibility in recent years. Participatory research, in turn, can be seen as an umbrella concept encompassing these approaches (see Figure 2, Kulmala et al. 2023). Still, the broad spectrum of terms can be challenging. 

On the other hand, one might ask how far definitions are actually necessary. Definitions that are too narrow may limit opportunities for citizen participation – even though such participation is, after all, the very core idea of the matter. Then again, without some form of shared definition, how can meaningful dialogue emerge? How can newcomers find their way into citizen science, both in terms of its practices and its broader goals? And how can it be used to argue for public support? (see Haklay et al. 2021). In some disciplines, there is even a degree of reservation toward the term “citizen science.” Thus, citizen science and its definitions can also be viewed as a form of boundary work around expertise and authority (Mayes 2022). Perhaps, in addition to the boundary work between professional researchers and those without formal research training – and between science and the broader society – there is also a negotiation of boundaries between academic disciplines themselves. 

The role of a citizen scientist 

Participation and inclusion are undoubtedly at the heart of citizen science – on that, there seems to be broad consensus. But are there certain prerequisites that must be met for an activity to be considered citizen science? Or, perhaps more importantly, to ensure a shared understanding that we are indeed talking about the same phenomenon? 

One way to approach the issue is through commonly agreed-upon definitions of a citizen scientist that are not tied to specific academic disciplines. The Finnish national Recommendation on citizen science (2022) defines the role of a citizen scientist in three ways. 

First, a citizen scientist is involved in at least one phase of the research process. 
Second, citizen scientists are not the subjects of research; they are the ones conducting it. This may seem self-evident, but in practice, the distinction is not always straightforward. Let’s consider a few examples. If we interview people about their opinions on, say, how government budget cuts are targeted, or analyze social media posts about hate speech, we may be conducting social research and studying citizens’ attitudes – but we are not, as such, giving them a role as researchers. They or their outputs are the objects of research. However, if peers interview one another about how they experience the effects of budget cuts, or if ordinary people help formulate survey questions or identify categories of hate speech in online discussions as part of a research project, then we are probably talking about citizen science. 

Third, the Recommendation states that research should usually be led by a trained professional researcher. It is the responsibility of this researcher and other trained researchers to ensure that citizen scientists understand what to do and how to engage in the research process, and that the quality of the research and data meets scientific standards. 

The European Citizen Science Association (ECSA 2015), in its ten principles of citizen science, adds that both professional researchers and citizen scientists benefit from their participation. In other words, citizen scientists are not involved merely because they are a free or low-cost resource, or because citizen science seemed like a promising addition in a funding application. 

A key figure in citizen science, Muki Haklay (2013) has focused his attention on the levels of participation in citizen science. According to Haklay, a citizen scientist can engage in crowdsourcing, distributed intelligence, participatory science, or collaborative science, the latter of which he refers to as “Extreme.” However, the model carries the risk of value judgment, even though it is not intended for comparing scientific disciplines. The role and tasks of a citizen scientist are defined in relation to the scientific field; what is appropriate or applicable in one field may not necessarily be so in another. 

The Promise of Inclusion 

The term citizen itself has drawn criticism (e.g., Ellwood et al. 2023). Not having official citizenship status within a state's borders – or facing state-specific conflicts related to citizenship – should arguably not be a barrier to engaging in research. As a term, citizen science can therefore appear or feel exclusionary, even though its foundational idea is about inclusion and equal opportunities for participation. 

Tauginiene et al. (2025) found that inclusion and public engagement are key motivations for researchers to promote citizen science projects. This leads to the question of whether people, in principle, have equal opportunities to participate in such projects. And in practice: are these projects discoverable with reasonable effort – how is this in Finland? Does participation require digital skills, possibly even advanced ones? How can sufficient skill levels be ensured in citizen science projects? After all, ensuring the competence of citizen scientists is also part of the research project itself, and through that, accessibility to citizen science could be improved. 

What about recruitment – does it reach a wide range of people? And are there geographical differences in participation – are some areas more easily included, while others are left out entirely? Internet connectivity certainly helps in this regard. But how can we reach marginalized groups? And does the ease of reaching certain groups shape who ends up participating? For instance, schools already offer a relatively smooth infrastructure for involving pupils and students in citizen science or science education. But what about older persons – how easily can they participate? 

As we can see, even though citizen science carries the promise of democracy and inclusion, there is still much to discuss regarding the conditions that make it truly accessible. 

Text: Senior specialist Paula Nissilä  

References and more information:  

ECSA (European Citizen Science Association) (2015). Ten Principles of Citizen Science. Berlin. http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XPR2N  

Ellwood ER et al. (2023) Citizen science needs a name change. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 38:6, pp. 485–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2023.03.003  

Haklay, M (2013). Citizen Science and Volunteered Geographic Information: Overview and Typology of Participation. Teoksessa D. Sui, S. Elwood, & M. Goodchild (Eds.), Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge, pp. 105–122. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7  

Haklay, M et al. (2021). What Is Citizen Science? The Challenges of Definition. In Vohland, K., et al. The Science of Citizen Science. Springer: Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58278-4_2  

Kulmala, M et al. (2023) Mitä on kanssatutkimus? In Meri Kulmala, Sanna Spišák & Satu Venäläinen (toim.) Kanssatutkimus. Ihanteet ja käytännöt. Tampere: Tampere University Press., 11–31. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-359-042-7  

Mayes, EC (2022). Citizen Science and Scientific Authority: Have You Checked the Boundary Work? Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 7(1): 42, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.519 

Open Science Coordination in Finland, Federation of Finnish Learned Societies (2022) Recommendation for citizen science. Responsible Research series 13:2022. 4th volume. Helsinki: Committee for Public Information and Federation (TJNK) of Finnish Learned Societies (TSV). https://doi.org/10.23847/tsv.445 

Tauginienė, L et al. (2025) Making responsible research and innovation meaningful in citizen science, Science and Public Policy, 52:3, pp. 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae078