The Status of Archaeological Research Design in Cultural Resource Management

Abstract

The recent research activity of contract archaeology is reviewed from the perspective of research design and its essential features. Some of the difficulties currently encountered in contract research are attributed to vague notions of research design, lack of general models and methods in the science of archaeology, and ineffective research organizations. It is argued that American contract research offers an unprecedented opportunity to test theories of human behavior, provided the profession can make the necessary organizational shifts in research orientation and structure. Some examples of various applied research designs are examined to indicate the kinds of successful adaptations being made in the contract sphere, as well as outright scientific contributions to the discipline. We conclude that contract archaeology has already provided at least three benefits to the profession (1) by forcing researchers to cope theoretically and methodologically with heretofore unexplored and unexplained archaeological remains, (2) by promoting a scientific merging of historical and prehistoric archaeology, and (3) by stimulating archaeologists to probe the resource base in new and explicit ways for all possible dimensions of significance.

A Survey Level Report of the Below Locust Creek Landside Ditch Cleancut Project, Craighead and Greene Counties, Arkansas

“…While the use of rtsearch des 'igns has not become a universal practice in CRM projects, there is an expanding acceptance among CRM professionals that carefully formulated research designs are prerequisite to successful applied research and to valid assessments of cultural resource significance (Goodyear, Raab and Klinger 1978;Iroquois Research Institute 1977;Raab and Klinger 1977).…”

Accumulations research: Problems and prospects for estimating site occupation span

“…Ethnoarchaeology and experimental archaeology became particularly important for understanding the accumulation of archaeological materials, including examination of the function, use-fife, and discard of artifacts (Gould et al, 1971;Coles, 1979;Murray, 1980;Hayden and Cannon, 1983;Deal, 1985;Arnold, 1990;Tani, 1995). Most accumulations research of the 1960s and 1970s focused on developing a middle-range theory of artifact accumulations (Schiller, 1972(Schiller, , 1976(Schiller, , 1988Goodyear et al, 1978;Ebert and Kohler, 1988;Mills, 1994). During that time, there was little in the way of traditional accumulations research based on the archaeological record alone, with the notable exception of the continued work of Cook (1972a, b), along with studies by McMichael (1960), Schiffer (1975bSchiffer ( , 1976, and Kohler (1978).…”

Clients, Contracts, and Profits: Conflicts in Public Archaeology

“…If contract archaeology is to have an adequate scientific foundation, contract researchers will have to conduct substantial creative research. The amount of research required will depend on our ignorance of the remains in question and the kinds of questions that need to be answered for assessment of the scientific meaning of archaeological resources (Goodyear 1978;King and Lyneis 1978). The responsibilities incumbent on contract researchers are therefore formidable -responsibilities they cannot meet by a purely technical approach or passive reliance on underdeveloped scientific ideas from noncontract research.…”