Hello, I just wanted to make a quick post encouraging people who are confidant about their identification skills to also, when they have time, go through observations that are already Research Grade and confirm their IDs too, not just ones that Need ID! It’s very simple: Sometimes observations that…

The idea is that a researcher is NOT going to RELY on community IDs, but they MIGHT form a starting dataset to look more closely at, by starting with observations that have more than TWO people confirming. There are taxa that lots of bad IDs, to find something that they MIGHT be able to use in their…

[image] nonbinary-naturalist: Hello, I just wanted to make a quick post encouraging people who are confidant about their identification skills to also, when they have time, go through observations that are already Research Grade and confirm their IDs too, not just ones that Need ID! As an add…

It depends on the research. If the researcher is working on one species or a small number of them, it may be viable and necessary to check the IDs. But if they are using millions of observations of many taxa to look at broader biodiversity patterns, that would be impossible, and in such a case the e…

Absolutely agree. Be they intentional or not, a small but notable number of false observations do make it to RG regularly often. I’ve been trying to check out RG observations as much as Needs ID ones a bit recently, and I really value the users here who’ve been doing that for much longer than I have…

By the way, when I’ve checked both, the RG observations have a higher percentage of correct ID than the “Needs ID” records we spend so much time on, often a much higher percent correct.

I’m currently looking over Research Grade Ptilidium observations and found a few incorrect ones. The observer was thankful that I corrected them.

As a specialist in the plant family Costaceae I filter for that family and regularly review any observation in that family and I agree it is important to add your “agree” even if it is already in Research Grade. By far the biggest problem I have seen is that the system defaults to “wild” and I see …

Also just to note - when you’re adding your IDs, check out the obs annotations and make sure they’re as good as they can be. Lots of people (myself included) don’t always bother setting these. I think it’s probably because they aren’t always in plain sight, but they can be very useful especially as…

[image] selvadero: I REALLY WISH INATURALIST WOULD CHANGE THE DEFAULT TO NOT WILD! That would send the wrong message. It would imply that most observations are not wild, which is the opposite of what we want to encourage. It makes the most sense for the expected norm to be the default and the…

I wish there was a way for people to like an ID rather than agree. I know I wanted to hit agree when I was new because of training in other social media where <3 is the norm. It is a hard habit to break. Also upping the points somehow from people that do know what they are doing would help. Woul…

Why You Should Add IDs to Research Grade Observations

General

Topic		Replies	Views
Are concurring ID's posted to a Research Grade observation useful? General question , id	35	2500	August 13, 2022
Is a single additional ID enough to have an observation safely confirmed General	28	1443	February 7, 2024
Adding unnecessary identifications to unique observations? General	43	1358	January 6, 2025
Why are Two agreeing IDs (and no disagreeing IDs) needed to achieve research grade? General question	49	1313	February 3, 2025
"research level" not always reliable General taxonomy	61	3424	November 16, 2022

Why You Should Add IDs to Research Grade Observations

Related topics