iNaturalist record replication speed and accuracy

Submitted by cubitmg on Tue, 24/05/2022 - 22:23

I have had iNaturalist records appearing in iRecord after just a few hours of being created. In one case the observer made an identification (which was incorrect) and someone else agreed and it appeared in iRecord. There was really no time for the iNat community to provide the check-and-balance that I thought was the whole point of it? This is maybe an iNat 'Research Grade' issue, but needs some thinking about. 

I have now made a new identification suggestion and the record mentioned above now says just Hadena. What happens if and when the corrected species taxon becomes Research Grade - does it come to iRecord again? What happens to the reidentified record in iRecord?

Submitted by Gustav Clark on Wed, 25/05/2022 - 10:05

Permalink

What you describe is the sort of scenario predicted when the whole idea of importing iNat records was suggested.  'Research Grade' may be the only quality control available but as you demonstrate it is pretty meaningless.  When looking for species occurrence in an area I just ignore iNat records - either it is so common that they aren't needed or if it is uncommon then I don't trust them.

Submitted by SWSEIC on Wed, 27/07/2022 - 12:42

Permalink

Agree that the speed of sharing record to iRecord from iNaturalist is too fast, as it is too easy for an inexperienced person on iNaturalist to offer an ID and the orginal recorder to accept it, making it research grade before any experienced person in the community has even had a chance to look at it. There needs to be more of a delay, in order for the community identification to have a better chance of correcting obvious errors.