Research trends in human osteology: A content analysis of papers published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology

Abstract

This paper explores recent research trends in human osteology, based on articles published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology (AJPA) during two 5-year intervals: 1980--1984 and 1996--2000. Topical "visibility" is measured in terms of article counts; "impact" is estimated through citation indices. Our results indicate that human osteologists continue to publish a range of methodological, analytical, and descriptive research papers that address a broad array of subjects. Analytical articles are cited more frequently than descriptive articles and thus have higher impact, reflecting the discipline's continued commitment to problem-oriented research. Differences in publication patterns exist between scholars during early and later stages of their careers. Articles published by students and Ph.D.s within 2 years of their doctoral degree are more frequently descriptive than analytical, when compared to people with longer career histories. Topics such as pathology, forensic anthropology, and biodistance modeling remain highly visible, while articles on the dentition have waned. An increase in functional research directed toward the postcranial skeleton is also reflected in our data. While continued visibility for morphological investigations is apparent, the impact of recently developed applications in bone chemistry and molecular anthropology is amply documented in our data, particularly during the more recent survey years.

Palaeopathology in Britain: a critical analysis of publications with the aim of exploring recent trends (1997–2006)

“…The analytical method used in this study considered and adapted aspects of the methodologies used by Mays (1997) and Stojanowski and Buikstra (2005) who conducted similar studies overviewing trends within journals. There are many outlets for academic research, but academic journal papers are the most widely read and referenced output within palaeopathology, and are also a reflection of current research, and were therefore chosen for this analysis.…”

“…The classification of papers into groups is not always straightforward; Stojanowski and Buikstra (2005) comment that there is always a degree of subjectivity. In this study, this was difficult to eliminate as the research was undertaken as part of an MSc dissertation and therefore only one author conducted the survey of papers.…”

“…This study seems especially timely in light of the current climate and concerns in relation to topics such as reburial in Britain (for example, see Smith, 2004). Whilst there have been previous studies on the nature of biocultural research in human osteology, most have looked more generally at osteological research, such as Stojanowski and Buikstra's (2005) paper which examined papers published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, while Mays (1997) made more general comments on the nature of the discipline such as the relationship of case-, population-and method-focused studies published between 1991 and 1995. However, previous research does not have the more complete overview of palaeopathology that the current study encompasses.…”

Using ancient DNA analysis in palaeopathology: a critical analysis of published papers, with recommendations for future work

“…Indeed, non-morphological approaches to the study of human remains have increased over the last two decades, with the percentage of molecular-based papers more than doubling from 2% to 5% in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology alone (Stojanowski & Buikstra, 2005). However, more traditional analyses in that journal still overshadow non-morphological applications.…”

Macroscopic Analysis and Data Collection in Palaeopathology

“…A recent analysis conducted by the Paleopathology Association (Stodder et al, 2006) highlights the controversy over the utility and need for the publication of descriptive case studies (Armelagos and van Gerven, 2003;Larsen 2005;Stojanowski and Buikstra, 2005) and brings to light the scope and frequency of palaeopathological research published in journal format. Palaeopathological research, they found, appeared in 286 different journals from 1996 to 2005, with 15 journals publishing 10 or more articles on the subject (Stodder et al, 2006: 9).…”