Author:
Nance Jack D.,Ball Bruce F.
Abstract
Shott's comments on Nance and Ball's article on test-pit sampling are off the mark. His comments reveal that Shott has misread the authors, that he generally has misinterpreted their intent, that he does not understand their research design and therefore does not know how to apply their findings, that he overlooks or avoids numerous important points made by the authors, and that he has his own unique view of archaeological data and survey methods.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Museology,Archaeology,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),History
Reference14 articles.
1. No Surprises? The Reliability and Validity of Test Pit Sampling
2. Shovel-Test Sampling as a Site Discovery Technique : A Case Study from Michigan;Shott;Journal of Field Archaeology,1985
3. Statistical Fact and Archaeological Faith : Two Models in Small Sites Sampling;Nance;Journal of Field Archaeology,1981
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献