Back to the edge: relative coordinate system for use-wear analysis

Calandra, Ivan; Schunk, Lisa; Rodriguez, Alice; Gneisinger, Walter; Pedergnana, Antonella; Paixão, Eduardo; Pereira, Telmo; Ioviţă, Radu; Marreiros, João

doi:10.1007/s12520-019-00801-y

Cited by 26 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Most changes were observed when the surfaces were brushed without sediment (BrushNoDirt). The slight changes observed on the control samples (before vs. after) are interpreted to be the results of measurements errors and also on the 14% error of the coordinate system used to re-locate the areas on the samples (Calandra et al, 2019a).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…A system of three beads was applied on all samples in order to be able to locate the same areas before and after the experiments (as described in Calandra et al, 2019a). Two samples (one per raw material) were kept as controls and were simply measured twice.…”

Section: Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1. Apply beads to define the coordinate system on the samples (Calandra et al, 2019a); 2. Clean the samples;…”

Section: Experimental Procedures Workflowmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating the microscopic effect of brushing stone tools as a cleaning procedure

Pedergnana¹,

Calandra²,

Bob

et al. 2020

Quaternary International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the microscopic effect of brushing stone tools as a cleaning procedure

Pedergnana¹,

Calandra²,

Bob

et al. 2020

Quaternary International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Being able to relocate the area of interest on a sample is also essential for reproducibility in use-wear studies. Recently, a simple protocol to create a coordinate system directly on the experimental samples has been proposed (Calandra et al 2019c) since visual relocation has limited applicability.…”

Section: A Complementary Experimental Workflowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, when using quantitative methods, reproducibility and repeatability are not automatic, and researchers need to be explicit, transparent, and extensive about their accounts of the methodology and settings. In order to secure repeatability and reproducibility in the discipline, standards and protocols are fundamental when studies aim for comparison and are even more important when quantification methods are applied (Calandra et al 2019c). Quantification methods such as 3D microtexture analysis should also not be used alone.…”

Section: Lack Of Standardization In Data Acquisition and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking Use-Wear Analysis and Experimentation as Applied to the Study of Past Hominin Tool Use

Marreiros

Calandra²,

Gneisinger³

et al. 2020

J Paleo Arch

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In prehistoric human populations, technologies played a fundamental role in the acquisition of different resources and are represented in the main daily living activities, such as with bone, wooden, and stone-tipped spears for hunting, and chipped-stone tools for butchering. Considering that paleoanthropologists and archeologists are focused on the study of different processes involved in the evolution of human behavior, investigating how hominins acted in the past through the study of evidence on archeological artifacts is crucial. Thus, investigating tool use is of major importance for a comprehensive understanding of all processes that characterize human choices of raw materials, techniques, and tool types. Many functional assumptions of tool use have been based on tool design and morphology according to archeologists' interpretations and ethnographic observations. Such assumptions are used as baselines when inferring human behavior and have driven an improvement in the methods and techniques employed in functional studies over the past few decades. Here, while arguing that use-wear analysis is a key discipline to assess past hominin tool use and to interpret the organization and variability of artifact types in the archeological record, we aim to review and discuss the current state-of-the-art methods, protocols, and their limitations. In doing so, our discussion focuses on three main topics: (1) the need for fundamental improvements by adopting established methods and techniques from similar research fields, (2) the need to implement and combine different levels of experimentation, and (3) the crucial need to establish standards and protocols in order to improve data quality, standardization, repeatability, and reproducibility. By adopting this perspective, we believe that studies will increase the reliability and applicability of use-wear methods on tool function. The need for a holistic approach that combines not only use-wear traces but also tool technology, design, curation, durability, and efficiency is also debated and revised. Such a revision is a crucial step if archeologists want to build major inferences on human decisionmaking behavior and biocultural evolution processes.

show abstract