Affiliation:
1. University of Cincinnati
Abstract
Our study uses computational archaeology tools to investigate how researchers in our field present interpretations of the past in patterned ways. We do so in order to illuminate assumptions, naturalised categories, and patterned interpretative moves that may direct or impact the ways we interact with our evidence and write about our research. We approach this topic through a meta-analysis, using large-scale textual data from archaeological publications, focusing on the case study of bone. Are there patterned ways that archaeologists write about artefacts like bone that are visible when analysing larger datasets? If so, what underlying ideas shape these shared discursive moves? We present the results of three analyses: textual groundwork, conducted manually by field experts, and two machine-based interactive topic modelling visualisations (pyLDAvis and a hierarchical tree based on a Model of Models). Our results indicate that there are, indeed, patterns in our writing around how artefactual and archaeological materials are discussed, many of which are overt and sensical. However, our analyses also identify patterned discourses that are less obvious, but still part of regularised discourses in written narratives surrounding bone. These include: the use of multiple conceptual positions within, rather than simply between, articles, and a lack of patterned centrality of indigenous ontologies in how our field writes about bone. This pilot approach identifies data-informed, applied tools that will aid reflexive practices in our field. These operate at a scale that impacts future scholarly interactions with both evidence and published interpretations by shifting observation and reflection from an individual or small group exercise to a larger and more systematic process.
Publisher
Council for British Archaeology
Reference87 articles.
1. Alberti, B. and Bray, T.L. 2009 'Introduction', Cambridge Archaeological Journal 19 (3), 337-43. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959774309000523
2. Andrushko, V.A., Buzon, M.R., Simonetti, A. and Creaser, R.A. 2009 'Strontium isotope evidence for prehistoric migration at Chokepukio, Valley of Cuzco, Peru', Latin American Antiquity 20 (1), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1045663500002510
3. Astor-Aguilera, M.A. 2010 The Maya World of Communicating Objects: quadripartite crosses, trees, and stones, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
4. Atalay, S. 2006 'Indigenous archaeology as decolonizing practice', The American Indian Quarterly 30 (3-4), 280-311. https://doi.org/10.1353/aiq.2006.0015
5. Aussenac-Gilles, N. 2006 'Ontology or meta-model for retrieving scientific reasoning in documents: The Arkeotek project' in Proceedings of the workshop on exploring the limits of global models for integration and use of historical and scientific information. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.154.9306&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Cited by
3 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