If the “agree” button was renamed “confirm”would you press it under the same circumstances?
The problem that the OP raises is when people hit agree without truly being able to confirm an ID. This might well not apply to you, I have no idea… but a large majority hit agree either completely blindly …or through superficial comparison. They think X looks like Y…but they might not actually know how to rule out Z…Q, W or indeed the rare but wonderful V. In this instance, they should withdraw, if their original ID is in conflict…, but they should not agree.
Superficial comparison might be fine in more charismatic or simpler taxa but impossible in more complex taxa.
The button is called “agree”, but in reality the etiquette of expected use is to “confirm”.
3 Likes
There’s a comment section for this.
I submit a Monarch butterfly. You come around and submit Viceroy butterfly because they look similar but X, Y & Z reasons rules out my Monarch. I look again, realize you are correct because I can see those traits too and hit Agree because I’m wrong and you’re right.
If we weren’t allowed to make mistakes then the app would only be available to scientists or iNat would put some on the payroll to ID stuff from 9 to 5.
3 Likes
You can’t just go and verify each id though, there’re many groups you can’t find keys online (or they cost money to get an article) and they have 200 similar looking species or a thousand of them, not always what looks close is what it is and if you’re not an expert in this taxon you can’t even tell the added taxon is right, but can tell yours was wrong.
1 Like
So if I submit Carolina chickadee and you submit black-capped chickadee (very similar species), iNat will kick it back up to the genus Poecile to reflect that we disagreed on the species but not the genus. What’s broken about that?
An ornithologist could come by and agree with either me or you and that would bring the ID back down to species again.
? @sbushes comment wasn’t about easy bird species, it’s about complex groups when expert add their id and user agrees because it looks similar, while they can’t exclude other species by themselves, someone else did it for them and now it’s RG even though who knows if it’s actually that species and if species even is idable from a presented photo. That’s what this topic is about, about people hitting Agree because it’s called misleadingly. Monarch or chickadee aren’t really hard groups and have enough iders to see mistakes, it’s not the same for small-sized Chryzomelidae or centipedes, fungi, etc. guessing ichneumonid species from a single pic, with two friends agreeing with it, such stuff that happens all the time.
1 Like
Then why would an expert add their ID if it can’t be identified by the photos submitted?
Because people can add any id they can, because they can think it’s this species, they can not know about other species possible, can have an old key or paper or just see it in cv suggestions.
1 Like
Some taxa are identifiable through photos by people with exceptional levels of experience but not by anyone else. There might not even be literature out there which covers it, only museum collections. Or even if there is, the literature is mind-bogglingly complex to wade through for the average Joe due to their lack of experience in the terminology, or whatever else.
Mistakes are a crucial part of learning and one of the reasons iNat is a brilliant platform.
But if someone is learning to ride a bike, you give them stabilisers to help them figure out the basics without falling off. You don’t give them a blindfold to make it even harder.
The choices in the design of the interface can support learning as well as mistakes without actively encouraging them.
Doubtless, if iNat could pay expertise to add IDs 9-5, they probably would :)
2 Likes
This isn’t a site where everybody is supposed to be an expert or expected to have access to scientific papers and complex ID guides for really really tricky species. You do the best you can and that’s that. The community gets a say too and if enough people jump in with their two cents eventually you can narrow something down pretty far or even nail the ID.
If you’re concerned that something gets marked “research grade” with an incorrect ID, don’t you think the scientist doing the research would be able to rule out the bad ones?
5 Likes
It’s the site where everyone should add ids they’re sure in, that’s the point, you can’t learn by simply agreeing or you can learn incorrect things, we as community should eliminate at least part of unnecessary work, scientists will check results, but it will need much shorter time than changing thousands of thousands of wrong ids, scientists are people too. There’s not enough people in fungi, arthropods, other groups, even irl there can be a single expert in the whole world.
I’m not even touching the part of wanting to have your own data clear.
3 Likes
Because iNat iOS app is a legitimate point for observations in the iNaturalist world.
It is not a user’s responsibility to figure out there are more features than shown in the iOS app or than were discussed in the iOS training video, especially lacking further guidance or direction from iNaturalist staff itself.
I was introduced to iNaturalist at a BioBlitz that gave a very brief intro to the mobile app. I had no possible way to know there was anything else out there.
The iNaturalist iOS app has a welcome video that shows users how to use the CV to make identifications of organisms they see around them. There is little discussion of other identification or factors that may facilitate other identification.
It is not for us to decide that INaturalist should present its facilities differently than it does. It is not for us to tell users they should not use the app as INaturalist directs them to do.
This is something to take up with the iNaturalist Support staff, not to the iOS users who have been given a very limited view of the iNaturalist capabilities and no orientation to the wider iNaturalist world.
7 Likes
Why would you call my data into question? It’s subject to the same scrutiny as everyone else’s here. If you disagree with something, submit what you think it is and if I think you’re right I’ll be happy to agree with you.
1 Like
That’s why I ask? Many don’t know about website, but if they know choosing the resource with more variabilities of possible actions sounds kinda logical, and that’s my question, not “decision” for others even though others stated website seems to remain the main focal point of new additions while ads are controvercially (though understandably because of modern era) done for mobile users, something should be changed one direction or another, but I wanted to hear from users who deliberately decided to stay on app mainly.
I never even talked about your data? Question it, what? I said from the perspective of a user, observer, I want my data to contain actual information, that’s why I don’t agree even with looking-good taxa, even though I did when I joined, also researched but not deep enough in some cases and in other cases it now just makes me question myself why and how I ided it? So I delete(d) those agrees when I come upon them unless now I have more knowledge on the group. e.g. This Tortricidae looks just spot on, but I remember the key for the family is 20+ big book pages with minute differences, so nah, let it be as it is.
2 Likes
Yes you did and I quoted it for you. Go ahead and do your thing. If iNat thought something was wrong with the platform or the way people used the site, they’d fix it. It’s just people who like nature trying their best. Bye.
No I didn’t? I talked about myself as I am identifying myself as observer first? It’s the forum were discussing changes. I see people using “you” as “me”, so I guessed it’s a common practice, I meant “ты хочешь, чтобы твои данные оставались коррекстыми” where you is used as description of the self of talker.
2 Likes
Sometimes because we know only one of the similar species is in the area. And, of course, sometimes because we think that but we’re wrong.
1 Like
Well, this is going on a tangent from the topic, so sorry.
I use the website for some stuff, but I mostly use the iOS app for uploading new observations. That’s because the website uploader works poorly on iPhone or iPad.I have an ancient Mac, but most all my online life is on mobile devices.
I’ve been told by staff a few times to avoid using the website with an iPhone or iPad as it has not been optimized for mobile devices. And, they are right. Using the website uploader with an iOS mobile device is often pretty miserable as it results in frozen screens quite frequently.
I can do other stuff on the website well enough with iOS mobile devices, but the uploader is too frustrating.
3 Likes
As a very relevant counterpoint to this, it seems like the CV can indeed distinguish between a leaf and a leaf-like insect/insect part, at least in some cases.
This observation just got uploaded: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/86364662
When I saw the thumbnail, I thought it was a leaf attached to a fence. But upon zooming in, I realised it was a leaf-mimicking caterpillar. I checked the CV suggestions - both before I added my ID and after I added my ID - and every single suggestion is for a species of moth, not a single suggestion is for a plant
6 Likes
From mine, it shouldn’t be. I see people hazarding guesses, and all it accomplishes is that it now takes three additional IDs to get to RG instead of just two. If a person really knows that little about nature, I had rather they take some time to learn rather than just randomly hazarding guesses.
I concur. The guesses I see, it looks like they ignored CV and just went with their gut.
When I don’t know something, I give it a broader ID that I do know. If I don’t know what that grass is, I’m not going to guess “Timothy Grass”; I’m going to say “Grasses.” When someone guesses, I have no reason to think that it is the “not knowing” type of ignorance; evidence suggests that it is the worse kind of ignorance, i.e., the “knowing what ain’t so.”
1 Like