2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2017.09.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Archaeology, biology, and borrowing: A critical examination of Geometric Morphometrics in Archaeology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 49 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 126 publications
0
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Analyses of artefact shape are neither new or novel (Okumura & Araujo, 2018), and it is not surprising that geometric morphometrics (GM) (sensu Corti (1993)) has captivated analysts of material culture due to the substantive contribution of morphology to lithic (Fox, 2015;Thulman, 2012;Wilczek et al, 2015) and ceramic typologies (Girrulat, 2006;Topi et al, 2017;Wilczek et al, 2014), additional categories of material culture (Chitwood, 2014;Ros et al, 2014;Windhager et al, 2012) and novel applications (Barceló, 2010;Lenardi & Merwin, 2010). Applications of GM in archaeology began with an analysis of irregular shapes by elliptic Fourier analysis (EFA) (Gero & Mazzullo, 1984), and iterative methodological improvements continue to expand the potential for analyses of shape as it relates to material culture ( Figure 1).…”
Section: Geometric Morphometrics In Archaeologymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Analyses of artefact shape are neither new or novel (Okumura & Araujo, 2018), and it is not surprising that geometric morphometrics (GM) (sensu Corti (1993)) has captivated analysts of material culture due to the substantive contribution of morphology to lithic (Fox, 2015;Thulman, 2012;Wilczek et al, 2015) and ceramic typologies (Girrulat, 2006;Topi et al, 2017;Wilczek et al, 2014), additional categories of material culture (Chitwood, 2014;Ros et al, 2014;Windhager et al, 2012) and novel applications (Barceló, 2010;Lenardi & Merwin, 2010). Applications of GM in archaeology began with an analysis of irregular shapes by elliptic Fourier analysis (EFA) (Gero & Mazzullo, 1984), and iterative methodological improvements continue to expand the potential for analyses of shape as it relates to material culture ( Figure 1).…”
Section: Geometric Morphometrics In Archaeologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While not explored here, this line of evidence may prove useful in discussions of standardisation (Topi et al, 2017) couched within examinations of craft specialisation (Costin, 1991(Costin, , 2005Costin & Hagstrum, 1995;Rice, 1991;Shepard, 1954). Certainly craft specialisation is not the only theoretical construct that has utility here, and results might also be expressed in discussions of communities of practice and identity (sensu Eckert (2008) and Eckert et al (2015)), or a wide range of additional approaches; however, the bulk of current archaeological applications of GM enlist evolutionary archaeology (Lycett, 2015;Okumura & Araujo, 2018).…”
Section: Hickory Fine Engraved and Smithport Plain Base/body Comparisonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While there are several morphometric approaches, landmarks-based geometric morphometrics is a powerful tool for the quantitative description of shape variability within and between groups [ 5 ]. This approach has been borrowed by archaeologists from various fields in biology, such as evolutionary biology and physical anthropology, where this method was originally developed and applied [ 21 – 22 ] (see [ 23 ] for a comprehensive review).…”
Section: Landmarks-based Geometric Morphometrics: a Brief Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These landmarks should have homology, that is, respective points should correspond across all specimens in the sample. While in biology homology can be based on phylogenetic, developmental or functional considerations, material culture objects lack such readily identifiable homologous landmarks [ 5 , 23 ]. To overcome this problem, the study of archaeological artifacts usually defines semi-landmarks [ 24 , 25 , 5 ].…”
Section: Landmarks-based Geometric Morphometrics: a Brief Overviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, discipline would benefit from transparent and reproducible methods that are widely applicable in distinguishing between the knapping techniques. During the last decade, geometric morphometrics (GMM) approaches have been more commonly applied to various forms of material culture, including knapped stone artifacts (Okumura and Araujo, 2019). GMM is a quantitative approach to shape analysis, where the shape is defined as -geometric properties of an object that are invariant to location, scale, and rotation‖ (Slice, 2005, p. 3).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%