What incentives encourage local communities to collect and upload mosquito sound data by using smartphones? A case study in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

Malaria is one of the deadliest vector borne diseases effecting sub-Saharan Africa. A suite of systems are being used to monitor and manage malaria risk and disease incidence, with an increasing focus on technological interventions that allow private citizens to remotely record and upload data. However, data collected by citizen scientists must be standardised and consistent if it is to be used for scientific analysis. Studies that aim to improve data collection quality and quantity have often included incentivisation, providing citizen scientists with monetary or other benefits for their participation in data collection. We tested whether monetary incentives enhance participation and data collection in a study trialling an acoustic mosquito sensor. Working with the community in two health districts in the Democratic Republic of Congo, we measured data collection participation, completeness, and community responses. Our results showed mixed responses to the incentive, with more participants interested in the social status and monetary value of the technology used than the monetary incentive itself. The effect of incentives on data collection varied over the course of the trial, increasing participation in the start of the trial but with no effect in the latter half of the trial. Feedback from participants showed that opinions on technology, research objectives, and incentives varied between communities, and was associated with differences in data collection quantity and quality, suggesting that differences in community interest in data collection and the incentives may be more important than the incentive value itself. These results suggest that though there is an initial benefit, extrinsic motivations do not override differences in intrinsic motivations over time, and enhanced communication and dialogue with participants may improve citizen science participation and attitudes. AttributionKES contributed to data curation, formal analysis, methodology, visualization, and writing the original draft. JPM contributed to formal analysis and visualization. EHM contributed to conceptualization, investigation, methodology, project administration, supervision, visualization, and the review and editing of the manuscript. EM, JZ, NMM, and SM contributed to conceptualization, investigation, methodology, data collection, and review and editing of the manuscript. RD, MS, IK, JE, YL, and SR contributed to conceptualization, methodology, and review and editing of the manuscript. KJW contributed to funding acquisition, methodology, supervision, and the review and editing of the manuscript. FundingThis study was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grant Award Number: OPP1209888.