Dogs, owners help validate citizen science

If you think your dog is smarter than all others, you might just get a chance to prove it one day — scientifically even.

Not only are sterile, cold environments, stark white coats and artificial lighting foreign and uninviting to most, in some cases they might just be unnecessary, and — though you’ve probably always had a hunch the contents of your fridge were worthy of science — it turns out your cozy abode might just be fit for research, too.

It’s called citizen science and while it was only entered into the Oxford English dictionary recently (2014 to be exact), it’s an aged concept that’s gained increasing momentum and popularity in the scientific world in the last decade or so.

link Sharna Johnson

In search of ponies

The concept is fairly straightforward — average citizens contribute to scientific research in collaboration or through supervision by professional scientists.

In the olden days, citizen scientists were most often well-to-do hobbyists who independently engaged in scientific observations or experiments (think metal key tied to a kite in a lightning storm …).

Modern applications for citizen science, however, are a little different from the ones of old, mostly because scientists have figured out citizens can be tremendously helpful in gathering large amounts of data from even larger areas.

Add to that the ease of exchanging information that comes with living in a technology-rich era, and you end up with things like bird watching apps for cell phones, which people can use to record the sightings of certain species, feeding habits and more, transmitting information directly to researchers real-time.

Of course, all great ideas come with potential problems, and one of the long-standing concerns about citizen science — in addition to wondering how far it can be taken — is the reliability of data collected by untrained individuals.

That’s where more than 500 average, citizen dogs (and their owners) come in.

Wednesday, a report was released by leading researchers from around the world — and hailing from institutions such as Harvard and Duke universities — who teamed up to look at the quality of data gathered by citizen scientists.

Incidentally, the study’s authors also claim theirs is the first citizen scientist project to have non-scientists conduct behavioral experiments.

Participants — more than 500 dog owners — followed detailed instructions provided via a website that guided them through experiments at home with their dogs and participants reported their results as they worked through the steps of each test.

Tests included experiments done previously with dogs in scientific laboratories such as response to arm pointing, foot pointing, memory versus smell, contagious yawning, memory delay and physical reasoning — all research with recognized, published findings.

When researchers evaluated the citizen scientist data and compared it to that obtained previously by scientists, they found that on the whole, there was little difference in the results.

Furthermore, they concluded there was no indication participants manipulated results, because among other safeguards, they were intentionally kept in the dark about what researchers were looking for.

And in some cases, unexpected things occurred — participants who were dog trainers performed equal to non-trainers, contrary to the expectation a dog handled by an experienced trainer would perform better.

In some instances, researchers speculated citizen scientists might have even obtained more accurate data because dogs were tested in the comfort of their own homes by people they knew, rather than by strangers in unfamiliar labs.

Ultimately, the study means dogs (and their people) have the distinct honor of being among the first to help validate citizen science as a way to broaden research to new levels and, in the end, learn more about the world — without lab coats.

Sharna Johnson is a writer who is always searching for ponies. You can reach her at:

[email protected]