Correction

After publication of Freitag, A., Meyer, R. & Whiteman, L., () it was brought to light that a small number of data errors and definitions were incorrect or required clarity. These errors do not compromise the central purpose and conclusions of the paper, with all other content remaining valid. The authors take responsibility for the occurrence of the errors. Details of the required corrections are below, along with the relevant page number of the original publication.

Table 1

Errors were present within the original Table 1 (p. 4–5) concerning the “Beach Watch” data (row 1) and the resulting “% employing strategy” (bottom row). The corrected Table 1 is presented below.

Table 1

Summary of credibility-building strategies and related context of 30 citizen science groups working in the Central Coast of California. Symbols in each column are explained in detail in the text, but each activity column was either Y/N for yes or no regarding whether the activity exists within the project or H/M/L/N for high/medium/low/no indicating the level of the activity. Each context column is Y/N for yes or no in answer to the question, S/M/L for small/medium/large depicting the size of a program component, or G/I for group or individual activity.

Credibility-building Strategies
totalContext for Strategies
early actionsin the fieldin the office

prior expertisetrainingscience advisingranking systemin-person oversightre-trainingtechnological aidsValidation of observationscross comparisonpublicationmanagement useQuality assurancesole source of data?institutional affiliationsize of volunteer poolgroup vs. individualtime commitment

Beach WatchNHYNNYYYYYYN8YYLGM
BeachCOMBERSNHYNNoptionalNYYYYN6YYMGM
BeachkeepersNNNNNNNNNNYN1YNLGL
Black Oystercatcher MonitoringYNYNNNNNNYYN4YNMGM
Blue Water Task ForceNLYNYNNNYYYY7NNLGM
CA King TidesNNNNNNYNNNNN1YNLIL
CCFRPNLYNYNNYNYYN6NYLGM
CWC (First Flush)NMYNNNYNNNYY5NNMGL
CWC (Urban Watch)NMYNmaybeoptionalYNNNYY7NNSGL
Elkhorn Slough (otters)YLYNNNYNYYYN7NYSGM
Elkhorn Slough (algae)YLYNYNNNNYNN5NYSGM
Elkhorn Slough (nestboxes)NMYNNNNNNYYN3NYSIH
Elkhorn Slough (shorebirds)YLYNYNNNYYYN6NYMGL
Grunion GreetersNMYNmaybeNNNYYYN5NYLGM
iNaturalistNNNYNNYYNYYN5NYLIL
JellywatchNNYYNNYYn/aYYN6YYLIL
Leatherback WatchNNYYNNYYNyNY6YYLIL
LighthawkYNYn/an/an/aYn/an/aYYn/a5YNSIM
LiMPETSNMYYYYNYYYYN8NYMGM
Marine Debris Action TeamsNMNNYNNYYYYN6NYMGM
Marine Debris TrackerNNNNNNYYNYYN4NYLIL
Monterey Bay NMS VMPNMYNmaybeNYNNYYY7NYLGH
Morro Bay NEP VMPNLYNYNYNYYYN6NYMIM
MPA WatchNLYNNNYYn/aNNN4YNMIH
Phytoplankton Monitoring ProgramNMYNNNNYYYYN6NYMIL
REEFNLYYNoptionalNYYYYN8NNLIL
Reef Check CAYMYYYYNYYYYN10NNLGH
Seabird Protection NetworkNLYYNNNYNYYN6NNLGM
Shorebird Monitoring (Morro Bay)NLYNYNNNNYYN5NNMGL
SPLASHNLYNNNYYNYYN6YNLIL
average:
% employing strategy2073832340204750408387175.6

Definitions

Two of the “credibility strategy” definitions (p. 6–7) required minor edits to provide clarification. The corrected text is given below.

– For the section “In the field” point 2 should read:

  • 2. In-person oversight – Many data errors happen in the field. To address this, some projects designate staff, science partners, or “expert” volunteers to directly oversee data collection (indicated as a “yes” in the table if in-person oversight is always part of volunteer data collection).

– For the section “In the office,” point 5 should read:

  • 5. Quality assurance protocol – For some topics, standard quality assurance protocols are a required part of scientific practice in order to calibrate methods, technology, and practice over time. For citizen science, these protocols also certify volunteer capability in addition to the methods. “Yes” in the table indicates that a QA protocol, broadly recognized as an accepted standard, is available and required.