Building Knowledge Together: Citizen Science, Communication, and Trust | 5 - 6 October 2026, Berlin

Citizen science is widely regarded as an important practice of public engagement with science, grounded in the assumption that participation naturally generates mutual trust between citizens and scientists. This assumption forms the theoretical basis for the central question posed by the PCST 2026 Berlin Symposium—whether trust in science can be fostered through participation and related science communication. Yet this optimistic narrative, which treats trust as a natural byproduct of participation, obscures a more complex reality: trust is not spontaneously generated but requires continuous production and maintenance as an ongoing achievement.

This study aims to reveal a form of labor that has long been overlooked in citizen science—the invisible work performed by project coordinators to sustain trust. The research questions focus on four dimensions: how does the citizen science project coordinator produce and sustain trust in her daily work? What strategies does she employ? What structural constraints does she face? What are the labor characteristics of this trust work? By addressing these questions, this study seeks to bring trust maintenance from the background into the foreground of academic inquiry.

The study draws on in-depth fieldwork conducted within a single citizen science project in ChinaAdopting a qualitative research design, the study employs in-depth interviews, work diaries, and WeChat group observation. The project manager responsible for core coordination was tracked over two months, supplemented by interviews with two assisting staff members.
.
Theoretically, this study draws on three interconnected traditions. Emotional labor theory reveals the affective work coordinators perform to manage participants’ emotional fluctuations. Invisible work theory explains why such labor remains persistently unrecognized institutionally. Studies of scientific practice extend the analytical lens beyond the laboratory, conceptualizing trust maintenance as the infrastructural labor of this emerging field of scientific practice. Integrating these traditions, this study proposes that trust maintenance constitutes a form of labor that is simultaneously emotional and invisible.

The research finds that the coordinator’s trust maintenance work comprises three interconnected forms of labor. First, technical interpretation labor refers to the communicative work performed to bridge the expertise gap between scientists and the public. The central challenge lies in the incomplete translatability of professional knowledge, requiring the coordinator to navigate between scientific rigor and public comprehensibility. Second, emotional labor refers to the affective work performed to manage participants’ emotional fluctuations. The central challenge lies in the individual variability and unpredictability of emotional experiences, requiring the coordinator to respond to participants’ anxieties and expectations on a one-to-one basis. Third, expectation management labor refers to the coordination work performed to balance scientific goals with public expectations. The central challenge lies in the difficulty of aligning these two sets of objectives, requiring the coordinator to continuously negotiate between dual responsibilities. These three forms of labor interweave in practice, collectively constituting the infrastructural foundation that enables citizen science projects to function

The theoretical contributions of this study are threefold. First, it reconceptualizes trust as an achievement requiring ongoing labor to maintain, rather than a natural precondition for collaboration. Second, it reveals the invisible character of trust maintenance labor and its institutional causes. Third, it deepens understanding of the emotional dimension of science communication, demonstrating that emotion management critically affects project success.
Practically, this study suggests that citizen science project designs should acknowledge the resource demands of trust maintenance work, develop evaluation mechanisms that recognize invisible labor, and incorporate emotion management into professional training. Methodologically, it demonstrates the value of combining in-depth interviews, work diaries, and WeChat group observation for capturing emotional interactions and invisible labor in science communication.

The central finding of this study responds to the core question posed by the PCST 2026 Berlin Symposium: trust can indeed be fostered through participation, but this fostering is not automatic. It requires coordinators to invest continuous, invisible, and often underappreciated everyday labor. Bringing this labor into academic view is not only a faithful representation of citizen science practice but also a deepening of the mission of science communication—science communication is not merely the transmission of knowledge but the maintenance of relationships, the production of trust, and the cultivation of public emotions.