We can’t prevent it totally, because iNat is an open platform that everyone can use and contribute to. I believe that scientists using iNat data in their research are aware of it (or at least they should be) and don’t treat RG observations as 100% confirmed. There can be wrong IDs as well as fake observations (pictures downloaded from internet, intentionally putting wrong location etc.). Still, I think that allowing people to share and try to ID their observations freely has more advantages than disadvantages for the science.
Related topics
| Topic | Replies | Views | Activity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Why You Should Add IDs to Research Grade Observations | 38 | 2920 | January 25, 2023 | |
| False "research grade" observations | 36 | 4368 | September 2, 2020 | |
| Remove ability for observers to agree with IDs on their own observations | 80 | 1655 | August 6, 2024 | |
| "research level" not always reliable | 61 | 3360 | November 16, 2022 | |
| Agreeing with experts and "research grade" | 115 | 14952 | August 1, 2019 |