Dana defense slides v2[1] (1)

570 views

Published on

Published in: Travel, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
570
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
382
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Dana defense slides v2[1] (1)

  1. 1. Collaborative science across the globe: The influence of culture and motivation on volunteers in the United States, India, and Costa Rica Dana Rotman, Ph.D. defense, March 11, 2013 Curi-Cancha reserve, Costa Rica
  2. 2. Collaborative scientific projects Ecology Other fields
  3. 3. Collaborative scientific projects Ecology Other fields
  4. 4. Outline • Research questions • Background literature • Theoretical background • Methods • Findings • Contributions • Limitations and future work
  5. 5. Research questions How can we motivate volunteers to continuously collaborate with scientists on large-scale biodiversity projects, in different cultures? What brings volunteers to contribute to ecology- related collaborative scientific projects? 1 Do volunteers’ motivations change over time? 2 Are the motivating factors similar in different cultures? 3
  6. 6. Background literature - science • Science – from individual to collaborative endeavor (Latour & Woolgar, 1972; Trane, 1972) • Inter-,multi-, trans-, cross- disciplinary science (Sonnenwald, 2007) • Collaboratories or cyberinfrastructure (Olson & Olson, 2000; Finholt, 2002; Bos et al. 2007)
  7. 7. Background literature – volunteers’ involvement in scientific work • Collaborations involving volunteers: • Contributory projects • Collaborative projects • Co-created projects (Bonney et al., 2009; Wiggins & Crowston, 2011) • Volunteers’ motivation • Initial motivation (Raddick et al., 2010; Nov et al. 2011) • Continuous motivation (Rotman et al. 2012)
  8. 8. Theoretical framework Culture Motivation Collaboration
  9. 9. Theoretical framework Culture National, Scientific, Collaborative “The collective programming of the mind that distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another” (Hofstede, 1980, p. 9) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PDI IDV MAS UAI LTO US India Costa Rica Individualism/ collectivism Femininity/ masculinity Power distance Uncertainty avoidance Long vs. short term planning Adapted from Hofstede, 1980, 2001
  10. 10. Theoretical framework Motivation Social-identity based motivations (Batson, Ahmad, Tsang, 2002) Increasing one’s own welfare Egoism Increasing the welfare of another individual within the group Altruism Increasing the overall welfare of the group Collectivism Upholding one or more principles Principlism The compilation of forces that direct human behavior toward attaining specific goals.
  11. 11. Methods Size and population Number of collaborative projects Estimated number of volunteers Surveys Interviews United States 3rd largest in size, 3rd in population Over 400 >100,000 142 (62 scientists; 80 volunteers) 13 (3 scientists; 10 volunteers) India 7th largest in size, 2nd in population 2 national, several dozen local < 10,000 156 (76 scientists; 43 students; 41 enthusiasts) 22 (6 scientists; 16 volunteers) Costa Rica 127th largest in size, 121st in population Several hundred ~ 50,000 - 9 (mixed roles) • 3 case studies • Quantitative surveys • Qualitative interviews
  12. 12. Findings Motivation Culture Collaboration
  13. 13. The United States 0 1 2 3 4 5 Altruism Collectivism Principalism Egoism Motivationallevel-Likertscale Motivational Factors Scientists Volunteers n = 142 Altruism Collectivism Principlism Egoism
  14. 14. The United States Personal interest “I think personal interest comes first. Personal interest and personal gain” Personal benefits Social benefits Ease of participation “You wanted to go down there with a magnet attached to your brain and try to absorb everything scientists had to say” Learning process Acknowledgement “It was nice to get something back, because people aren’t going to keep on doing that unless there’s something coming back” Community- related motivations “It’s the combination of being an effective citizen scientist and seeing the community thrive… people really care about their natural resources here” InitialContinued
  15. 15. India 0 1 2 3 4 5 Altruism Collectivism Principlism Egoism motivationallevel-Likertscale Motivational factors Scientists Students Enthusiasts N = 156
  16. 16. India Personal benefit “It will benefit me to increase my knowledge and …. for my experience for my future prospects or any other” Tangible rewards “They are not rich, they can do anything for you just for 50 Rupees, they will gather every information for just 50 Rupees” Learning process “If people contributing data have some control over how [the data] is used, I think if that’s made clear to people that might encourage people to really contribute a little more”Ease of participation Community- related motivations “Environmental education I see it like kind of drugs, you know, I had [to] inject [sic] into the kids, catch them young… They will never be able to go away from this and they will never be able to do against nature” InitialContinued
  17. 17. Costa Rica Culture’s role “If you visit Costa Rica and you talk to a cop, driver, or maybe a bus driver or people that work in a restaurant, they will make you a conversation about the topics of environment and their importance, there’s a true moral thing”Education Individual and Community- related motivations “There is a sense of social responsibility or environmental responsibility” Continuous collaboration “A volunteer can participate at any level of research in my opinion. From a person who has no experience and needs to be trained to participate, to someone who has the same academic qualifications as the scientists and who just isn’t being paid” InitialContinued
  18. 18. Findings Motivation Culture Collaboration
  19. 19. The United States Locale “I think every small town should have a citizen nature network where they have specific speakers come in who work with specific animals they may never in their lives come into contact with… they can get in touch with the natural world immediately around them” Scientists and volunteers “I think that the most challenging thing is to say to scientists that you want to do something, without some of the fear they will consider you to be some annoying amateur”
  20. 20. India Social stratification and hierarchy “I am sure you will notice that somewhat hierarchy of society so people won’t often express their feelings” Trust “Why is he showing his interest so much? He is eager for his fellowship money, than I have to think 100 times, but if he is eager for the knowledge he wants to gather, than most welcome…” Language “There are people who cannot understand English, especially when it comes by itself… people will go more and learn if we use common language” Bureaucracy “One thing in India, unless you are a part of the government or a government institute, it’s very difficult to get access to all the existing data as well as to carry on your part”
  21. 21. Costa Rica Government support “A journalist was asking people if they would be supportive of a tax to protect the country’s rain forests. And the people responded that ‘yes, they would be OK with that’ … I often comment to my colleagues, ‘We must be crazy in Costa Rica! Accepting a tax!” Public support Language “Access is not just technical, it’s language and the process of data collecting… Again, it’s a role that citizen scientists often take on, as an interpreter or translator, even more so than scientists”
  22. 22. Findings Motivation Culture Collaboration
  23. 23. The collaboration cycle – The United States Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Personal interest Active collaboration Positive within- project relationship Continuous collaboration Personal interest, self efficacy Trust, acknowledgement, mentorship Education and outreach, policy and activism Positive within- project and external relationships Self-directed motivations Initiating participation culture culture culture culture
  24. 24. The collaboration cycle – India Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Personal benefit Active collaboration Self-directed motivation, pos itive within- project relationship Continuous collaboration Personal interest, self promotion self-promotion, acknowledgement, mentorship Education and outreach, self-promotion, acknowledgement Self-directed motivations Positive within- project and external relationships Initiating participation culture culture culture culture Self-directed motivations
  25. 25. Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Social responsibility Active collaboration Positive within- project relationship Continuous collaboration Social responsibility, self- efficacy, self- promotion, personal interest Common goals, trust, acknowle dgment Education and outreach, policy and activism, acknowledgement Positive within- project and external relationships Initiating participation culture culture culture culture Collective motivations, self-directed motivations The collaboration cycle – Costa Rica
  26. 26. The collaboration cycle - differences Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Personal/ social aspects Self vs. collective motivations Active collaboration Self directed motivations vs. within-project relationship Continuous collaboration Self directed motivations vs. within project and external relationships Initiating participation culture culture culture culture Potential attrition point (only India)
  27. 27. Key contributions – research questions What brings volunteers to contribute to ecology-related collaborative scientific projects? • Self directed motivations (US, India) • Collective motivations (Costa Rica) 1 Do volunteers’ motivations change over time? • Through a combination of self directed factors, internal and external relationships, motivation is reshaped and changes over time, affecting participation practices 2 Are the motivating factors similar in different cultures? • Culture has a nuanced but strong effect on motivation and participation in collaborative scientific projects • Cultural barriers vs. cultural support 3
  28. 28. Key theoretical contributions Theoretical contribution • A more nuanced look at Batson et al. theory of social motivation, specifically for collaborative science 4 Potential attrition point Potential attrition point Personal/ social interest Self vs. collective motivations Active collaboration Self directed motivations vs. within-project relationship Continuous collaboration Self directed motivations vs. within project and external relationships Initiating participation culture culture culture culture
  29. 29. Limitations and future work • Not generalizabe • Costa Rica survey • Personal cultural perspective Limitations • Extending the study to other countries • Determining the role of technology • Suggesting design guidelines • Viewing cultural differences as opportunities and not just challenges Future work
  30. 30. Thank you! Committee members  Dr. Jenny Preece, Chair  Dr. Brian Butler  Dr. Kari Kraus  Dr. Katie Shilton  Dr. David Jacobs NSF  Biotracker SoCS grant(10-0352)  Extreme ethnography EAGER grant (11019993 ) Special thanks The Biotracker team, EOL Maggie Rodriguez, Jen Hammock, Carol Boston, Sabah Rubina, Chitra Ravi Toucan rescue ranch, Costa Rica

×