Blind IDers and audio IDs

[daniel5]

@jhousephotos

Not blind but the audio function on iNat is super slept on. So many recordingss go straight into the Unknown pool due to mainly new users not putting in a very basic ID on their observations. It’s kinda frustratingly repetitive sometimes, but I’m always pleasantly surprised when I come across a buried cicada song

As someone currently trying to make a study of true katydid songs, the number of katydid recordings that end up as unknown is absolutely staggering. The funny thing about katydids, though, is many people genuinely do not know what is making the sound, or confuse them with frogs! But yes, the audio functionality is in dire need of a tutorial.

[daniel5]

I know of that project, but I don’t see it as all that helpful. Would there be a way to create a project which would automatically collect all observations with sounds? It would take some of the workload off, I would think.

@DianaStuder

But there are 3 managers. Maybe chat to them about a spin off project - Audio for Blind Identifiers. It would be informative to draw together interested iNatters

@DianaStuder Maybe I’m dense, but I still don’t see the value in that potential project… I already know most of the prolific audio identifiers (@douch, @joedziewa, @jhousephotos, @spinifer, @zealouswizard, etc). There just aren’t that many of us, and I scour enough that if there were overlap I would already have detected it.

[fluffyinca]

I think part of the issue with that is that it’s harder to know what basic ID to use. With photos, it’s nearly always obvious whether something is a plant, a fungus, a bird, an insect, etc. With audio, you have to have a bit more knowledge to start with. I sometimes can’t tell the difference between a bird and a squirrel. And maybe that background chirping noise is a cicada, but maybe it’s a frog. There’s no obvious way to tell the difference if you’re inexperienced.

[daniel5]

That’s true, though you can pretty confidently call it an animal. ;) The only commonly-heard exception I can think of is trees rubbing.

[upupa-epops]

@spiphany

If you want to exclude observations that you have already ID’d from the search results, you can add the text &reviewed=false to the end of the URL.

Does this work on the Explore page or only in Identify?

[jhousephotos]

A basic ID doesn’t have to be correct to start off. It just shouldn’t be left as “Unknown”, that’s what I’m saying. More often than not, the observer will retract their original ID once corrected.

[spiphany]

It seems to work on the Explore page; that’s why I suggested it. Is it not giving the expected results for you?

It is from the list of search URLS for the Explore page here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/how-to-use-inaturalists-search-urls-wiki-part-1-of-2/

[spiphany]

@daniel5

Maybe I’m dense, but I still don’t see the value in that potential project

Projects can serve a few different purposes depending on how they are set up. Depending on your needs, they may not offer any useful additional functions.

Traditional projects: users add observations manually to the project. This is useful for collecting observations there would otherwise be no way to search for. For example, if you wanted to be able to refer to audio observations with begging calls by juvenile birds, a traditional project would allow you to put them all in one place.

A collection project is essentially a saved search. So you could create a collection project for all observations with audio. This would allow you to go directly to the explore page and get only the audio observations without having to apply filters. Collection projects are particularly useful as a shortcut if you frequently want to refer to a set of observations that requires multiple search parameters (for example, audio observations of birds in a certain location that are “needs ID”), because this saves you from having to enter all the search criteria each time you want to listen to or ID observations.

Another purpose of projects is to bring people together. For finding people who also ID audio files this part may be unnecessary, since you can use the leaderboards on the explore page. But iNat is also a social community, and some people find it meaningful to know there are other users who self-identify the same way they do (for example, LGBTQ users, or disabled users). More importantly, people also use projects as an information hub. Identifiers interested in a particular taxon or members of a local nature group might use projects to share resources, discuss challenges, or coordinate activities. This can be done by making journal posts. Generally only project administrators can create journal posts, but anyone can comment on them.

I think the reason some people have suggested creating a project for blind iNat users is because it could be a way to promote awareness about the existence of users like yourself and potentially also give you and other users a place to support each other and share strategies for dealing with the limitations of iNat’s interface. (Of course you are welcome to continue to share your experiences in the forum. I have found your posts valuable for shedding light on what barriers unfortunately still exist on iNat. It is more a question of whether you would value the solidarity of having a project specifically for other users who deal with the same challenges you do.)

[jasonhernandez74]

@daniel5

The only commonly heard exception I can think of is trees rubbing.

I also often hear “barking sand.” That one doesn’t even qualify as Life.

[daniel5]

Thank you for these helpful suggestions - they have given me food for thought. I might consider searching up disabled naturalist projects or else creating one myself.

[spiphany]

It looks like there is one project that was recently created and therefore does not yet have many members: https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/disabled-naturalists

This does highlight one problem with projects: they are only useful for networking if people find and join them, and the search function for projects is so abysmal that this can be rather difficult.

[daniel5]

@spiphany

the search function for projects is so abysmal

Why abysmal? I’ll grant I did not find this project just before you posted, but I searched “blind”, not “disabled”. When I searched “disabled” after your post, it’s the fifth down.

But yes, the project only has three members, now including myself. This is why I didn’t really think a blind naturalists project, even more niche than the one you linked, would do much.

[spiphany]

Well, “disabled” is apparently unique enough that it allows for the project to be found, but “blind” produces lots of irrelevant results (e.g. “blindfoot”), because the search apparently uses fuzzy terms and there is no way to distinguish between words in the project title and words in the description. And “audio” gives you several hundred results, most of which are not primarily about audio observations.

[daniel5]

Ah, I see what you mean. I did browse through all the “blind” results and found nothing. In this case, since few other keywords would be used for a project of this sort, it’s likely none exists. Does the search function not accept exact queries via quotation marks?