NEARCHOS. Networked Archaeological Open Science: Advances in Archaeology Through Field Analytics and Scientific Community Sharing

Abstract

The full release and circulation of excavation results often takes decades, thus slowing down progress in archaeology to a degree not in keeping with other scientific fields. The nonconformity of released data for digital processing also requires vast and costly data input and adaptation. Archaeology should face the cognitive challenges posed by digital environments, changing in scope and rhythm. We advocate the adoption of a synergy between recording techniques, field analytics, and a collaborative approach to create a new epistemological perspective, one in which research questions are constantly redefined through real-time, collaborative analysis of data as they are collected and/or searched for in an excavation. Since new questions are defined in science discourse after previous results have been disseminated and discussed within the scientific community, sharing evidence in remote with colleagues, both in the process of field collection and subsequent study, will be a key innovative feature, allowing a complex and real-time distant interaction with the scholarly community and leading to more rapid improvements in research agendas and queries.

Educommunication and Archaeological Heritage in Italy and Spain: An Analysis of Institutions’ Use of Twitter, Sustainability, and Citizen Participation

“…Since the Faro Convention [77], the concept of heritage communities has been defined as "people who value specific aspects of cultural heritage which they wish, within the framework of public action, to sustain and transmit to future generations" (p. 2). We believe that introducing or transferring this concept to the web 2.0 enables us to talk about heritage cyber communities [4,6,11] where we not only consider safeguarding or promoting heritage but also a transcendental experience of lifelong learning through the exchange of information and opinions in an online context [7], characterized by the interconnectivity and the preeminence of the ephemeral. While this seems to be contrary to "lifelong learning", it should be seen as an opportunity for a museum to diversify its offer, not only in terms of promotion (exhibitions, news, etc.)…”

“…This promotes interaction between users and the creation of cyber communities, in the strictest sense of roots and virtual communities [4,5] or digital communities of practice [6]. This has even been described as a space for synergy with a collaborative approach [7] and for co-creation as a key element in sustainability [8]. For these actions to take place, heritage educommunication through social networks is essential [9] as a channel that brings society closer to, reveals, and attempts to make heritage understood, as well as to value, enjoy, and, ultimately, educate society about the same.…”

Assessing Open Science Practices in Phytolith Research

“…These benefits include: open access publications achieving increased citations and being more accessible for students and non-academic collaborators; open data makes our own past research likely to be better documented and easier to reuse; and open methods improve reproducibility and help us to publish our scientific workflows more easily. Other recent articles focus on computational archaeology (Schmidt & Marwick 2020), data sharing in zooarchaeology (Kansa et al 2020) and innovative open field archaeological strategies (Marchetti et al 2018).…”

Pre-print of Assessing Open Science Practices in Phytolith Research

“…Over the past decade there has been growing awareness of this issue and a recent article summarising open science in archaeology (Marwick et al 2017) sought to encourage this approach by highlighting its benefits to the archaeological community. Subsequent articles include focuses on computational archaeology (Schmidt & Marwick 2020), data sharing in zooarchaeology (Kansa et al 2020) and innovative open field archaeological strategies (Marchetti et al 2018).…”