The training–discovery paradox: Evidence from citizen science
4 affiliations
- 1Computer Information Systems, Bentley University, Waltham, Massachusetts, United States of America.
- 2Faculty of Business Administration, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
- 3McIntire School of Commerce, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, United States of America.
- 4Faculty of Mathematics & Computer Science, Modern College of Business and Science, Muscat, Oman.
Abstract
Training enhances classification accuracy in citizen science by directing visual attention toward predefined features, but may constrain attention to unexpected objects or features. We examined this tradeoff through an analysis of 206 citizen science discoveries and through controlled experiments using eye-tracking and verbal protocols. The analysis of existing discoveries showed that untrained contributors produced a broader range of discovery types, including the majority of opportunistic and serendipitous discoveries. In the primary experimental study, explicitly trained observers showed 34% fewer fixations on non-diagnostic features compared to untrained observers. Training also reduced attention to secondary entities and constrained how observers described novel stimuli, a phenomenon we term classification transference. Trained observers described unfamiliar entities by referencing missing trained-category features rather than reporting new attributes. Implicitly trained observers preserved broader attentional sampling while maintaining sensitivity to variation. The second experimental study provided a robustness check with 84 additional participants using written responses and confirmed the patterns observed in the first experiment. These findings demonstrate that training shapes both where observers look and what they report, establishing a perceptual boundary on discovery potential that conventional accuracy measures cannot detect.
Related
- Who Eats Whom? A global food web derived from citizen science
- Americans’ multidimensional relationship with science: Is citizen science a path forward?
- Five Decades of Citizen Science Reveal Erosion of Hotspots of Multifaceted Plant Diversity
- Citizen science data as a tool for monitoring moss diversity in Poland: potential and limitations
- Nationwide citizen science reveals core and rare osmotolerant yeast communities in Swedish honey
BibTeX
@article{ogunseye2026trainingdiscovery,
title = {{The training–discovery paradox: Evidence from citizen science}},
author = {Shawn Ogunseye and Jeffrey Parsons and Roman Lukyanenko and Yoones Sekhavat},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0361148},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361148},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - The training–discovery paradox: Evidence from citizen science
AU - Shawn Ogunseye
AU - Jeffrey Parsons
AU - Roman Lukyanenko
AU - Yoones Sekhavat
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0361148
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0361148
AB - Training enhances classification accuracy in citizen science by directing visual attention toward predefined features, but may constrain attention to unexpected objects or features. We examined this tradeoff through an analysis of 206 citizen science discoveries and through controlled experiments using eye-tracking and verbal protocols. The analysis of existing discoveries showed that untrained contributors produced a broader range of discovery types, including the majority of opportunistic and serendipitous discoveries. In the primary experimental study, explicitly trained observers showed 34% fewer fixations on non-diagnostic features compared to untrained observers. Training also reduced attention to secondary entities and constrained how observers described novel stimuli, a phenomenon we term classification transference. Trained observers described unfamiliar entities by referencing missing trained-category features rather than reporting new attributes. Implicitly trained observers preserved broader attentional sampling while maintaining sensitivity to variation. The second experimental study provided a robustness check with 84 additional participants using written responses and confirmed the patterns observed in the first experiment. These findings demonstrate that training shapes both where observers look and what they report, establishing a perceptual boundary on discovery potential that conventional accuracy measures cannot detect.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -