Language use in ancestry research and estimation

Abstract

Recent discussions have revolved around the concept of ancestry and ancestry estimation; however, the associated terminology and its theoretical underpinnings have not been similarly examined. This research evaluates the concepts (e.g., race, ancestry, ethnicity) currently in use, examines if they are consistent with the groups employed to illustrate them (e.g., Black, European, Hispanic), and looks for patterns in language usage. Articles in the Anthropology, Odontology, and General sections of the Journal of Forensic Sciences between 2009 and 2019 were evaluated for ancestryrelated language use. For each article, the concepts, examples, and bibliographic information were recorded, and the relationship between concept and example was examined. These data were cross-tabulated to evaluate relationships between the variables. Cramer's V was used to assess the strength of association of these relationships. In this sample, ancestry predominates, especially recently The concept used is significantly associated with all variables except publication date and authors' institution(s). Despite the prevalence of the ancestry concept, racially based terms for individual groups were common. The use of ancestry, over race, in forensic contexts has been suggested to be a primarily linguistic change; these results may support that assertion. Inconsistent language usage leads to a lack of clarity in meaning among researchers and misinterpretation of the data. It is critical to recognize that inconsistencies exist, but also to understand why they exist. These results underscore the long overdue need for the inclusion of diverse perspectives in forensic anthropology, especially in the current conversations surrounding ancestry and ancestry estimation.

Uncloaking a Lost Cause: Decolonizing ancestry estimation in the United States

“…Both authors declare no conflict of interest. with our disjointed approach to terminology use, for example, Black versus black versus African American (Maier et al, 2021), and in primarily although not exclusively older (c. 10+ years) publications, use of anachronistic and blatantly racist taxonomic terms ending in -oid; and discordance with the simultaneous insistence that we do not consider ancestry and social race to be one and the same. 6 In a remarkable and extraordinary coincidence, one of the athletes highlighted by Cobb is the first author's grandfather, track and field star Eulace Peacock.…”

Evaluating population affinity estimates in forensic anthropology: Insights from the forensic anthropology database for assessing methods accuracy (FADAMA)

“…Arguments against its use seem to focus not on any substantive shortcomings of the term, but rather on the simple fact that it is not widely used within the discipline. We have also heard the opinion that this is a mere terminological change—perhaps akin to the sleight of hand evidenced in our discipline's transition from racialized to ancestral terms several decades ago [2,3]. Yet, framing our analyses within the language and approaches of population affinity does not entail a mere change in terms but a change in meaning.…”

“…Lastly, by helping to link the individual in question with a once-living person, ancestry estimation can play a role in justifying the DNA profile comparisons that ultimately exclude potential matches or make positive the presumptive identification. The terminology of "ancestry" rather than "race" has been utilized within the field increasingly since the 1990s-and almost exclusively within the last decade [1][2][3]. Yet, the practice of estimating a decedent's ancestry descends directly from a racialized, typological approach to human variation [4,5].…”

“…The terminology of “ancestry” rather than “race” has been utilized within the field increasingly since the 1990s—and almost exclusively within the last decade [1–3]. Yet, the practice of estimating a decedent's ancestry descends directly from a racialized, typological approach to human variation [4,5].…”

Ancestry Studies in Forensic Anthropology: Back on the Frontier of Racism

“…); and a paper on Native American, Japanese, and Thai samples. This literature review clearly illustrates the lack of purpose, consensus, and consistent usage of the nomenclature; suggesting that the transition from race to ancestry was primarily a linguistic change (see [13] that covers the problems with nomenclature). The many iterations of "Hispanic" are a result of the 2008 migrant death symposium at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences annual meeting dealing with the difficulty of identifying unidentified bordercrossers (UBCs) in the United States.…”