I emphasize some common misuses of statistics that everyone, whether you do statistics or just read what others write, should be on the lookout for. I next discuss somewhat more complicated issues in archaeological method and theory and then conclude with a qualitative explanation of Bayesian methods and why they are often preferable to the frequentist methods advocated in many introductory statistics texts.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Literature Cited

  1. Allen MS, Morrison AE. 2013. Modelling site formation dynamics: geoarchaeological, chronometric and statistical approaches to a stratified rockshelter sequence, Polynesia. J. Archaeol. Sci. 40:4560–75 [Google Scholar]
  2. Athens JS, Rieth TM, Dye TS. 2014. A paleoenvironmental and archaeological model-based age estimate for the colonization of Hawai'i. Am. Antiq. 79:1144–55 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baxter M. 2003. Statistics in Archaeology New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  4. Baxter M. 2015. Exploratory Multivariate Analysis in Archaeology Edinburgh: Edinburgh Univ. Press, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  5. Bayliss A. 2009. Rolling out revolution: using radiocarbon dating in archaeology. Radiocarbon 51:1123–47 [Google Scholar]
  6. Beramendi-Orosco L, González-Hernández G, Urrutia-Fucugauchi J, Manzanilla LR, Soler-Arechalde AM. et al. 2009. High-resolution chronology for the Mesoamerican urban center of Teotihuacan derived from Bayesian statistics of radiocarbon and archaeological data. Quat. Res. 71:99–107 [Google Scholar]
  7. Brainerd GW. 1951. The place of chronological ordering in archaeological analysis. Am. Antiquity 16:301–13 [Google Scholar]
  8. Brumfiel EM. 1995. Heterarchy and the analysis of complex societies: comments. Heterarchy and the Analysis of Complex Societies RM Ehrenreich, CL Crumley, JE Levy 125–31 Arlington, VA: Am. Anthropol. Assoc. [Google Scholar]
  9. Buck C, Cavanagh WG, Litton CD. 1996. Bayesian Approach to Interpreting Archaeological Data Chichester, UK:: Wiley [Google Scholar]
  10. Carballo DM, Pluckhahn T. 2007. Transportation corridors and political evolution in highland Mesoamerica: settlement analyses incorporating GIS for Northern Tlaxcala, Mexico. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 26:607–29 [Google Scholar]
  11. Chernoff H. 1973. The use of faces to represent points in k-dimensional space graphically. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 68:361–68 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chernoff M. 1982. Empirical Bayes Estimation of ceramic proportions at Teotihuacan Presented at Annu. Meet. Soc. Am. Archaeol., Minneapolis, MN [Google Scholar]
  13. Cowgill GL. 1964. Statistics and sense: more on the Purum case. Am. Anthropol. 66:1358–65 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cowgill GL. 1968. Computer analysis of archaeological data from Teotihuacan, Mexico. New Perspectives in Archeology SR Binford, LR Binford 143–50 Chicago: Aldine [Google Scholar]
  15. Cowgill GL. 1970. Some sampling and reliability problems in archaeology. Archéologie et Calculateurs JC Gardin 161–75 Paris: CNRS [Google Scholar]
  16. Cowgill GL. 1972. Models, methods, and techniques for seriation. Models in Archaeology D Clarke 381–421 London: Methuen [Google Scholar]
  17. Cowgill GL. 1975a. A selection of samplers: comments on archaeo-statistics. Sampling in Archaeology J Muller 258–74 Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press [Google Scholar]
  18. Cowgill GL. 1975b. On causes and consequences of ancient and modern population changes. Am. Anthropol. 77:505–25 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cowgill GL. 1977. The trouble with significance tests and what we can do about it. Am. Antiq. 42:3350–68 [Google Scholar]
  20. Cowgill GL. 1989. The concept of diversity in archaeological theory. Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology R Leonard, G Jones 131–41 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  21. Cowgill GL. 1990a. Artifact classification and archaeological purposes. Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology A Voorrips 61–78 Bonn, Ger: HOLOS Verlag [Google Scholar]
  22. Cowgill GL. 1990b. Toward refining concepts of full-coverage survey. The Archaeology of Regions: A Case for Full-Coverage Survey S Fish, S Kowalewski 249–59 Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst. Press [Google Scholar]
  23. Cowgill GL. 2005. Things to remember about statistics (whatever else you forget). SAA Archaeol. Rec. 5:435 [Google Scholar]
  24. Cowgill GL. 2006. Using numerous cases to extract valid information from noisy surface data at Teotihuacan. Managing Archaeological Data: Essays in Honor of Sylvia W. Gaines JL Hantman, R Most 147–54 Tempe: Ariz. State Univ. Anthropol. Res. Pap. 57 [Google Scholar]
  25. Cowgill GL. 2008. How I got to where I am now: one thing after another, a (mostly) linear narrative. Anc. Mesoam. 19:2165–73 [Google Scholar]
  26. Cowgill GL. 2013a. Conversation with William L. Rathje and Michael Shanks. Archaeology in the Making: Conversations through a Discipline WL Rathje, M Shanks, C Witmore 185–203 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  27. Cowgill GL. 2013b. Possible migrations and shifting identities in the Central Mexican Epiclassic. Anc. Mesoam. 24:1131–49 [Google Scholar]
  28. Cowgill GL. 2015a. Ancient Teotihuacan: Early Urbanism in Central Mexico New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  29. Cowgill GL. 2015b. We need better chronologies: progress in getting them. Latin Am. Antiq. 26:26–29 [Google Scholar]
  30. Cowgill GL, Altschul JA, Sload R. 1984. Spatial analysis of Teotihuacan: a Mesoamerican metropolis. Intrasite Spatial Analysis in Archaeology H Hietala 154–95 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  31. Drennan RD. 2009. Statistics for Archaeologists: A Common Sense Approach New York: Springer, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  32. Drennan RD, Peterson CE. 2004. Comparing archaeological settlement systems with rank-size graphs: a measure of shape and statistical confidence. J. Archaeol. Sci. 31:533–49 [Google Scholar]
  33. Drennan RD, Peterson CE. 2008. Centralized communities, population, and social complexity after sedentarization. The Neolithic Demographic Transition and Its Consequences JP Bocquet-Appel, O Bar-Yosef 359–86 New York: Springer [Google Scholar]
  34. Efron B. 2013. Bayes' theorem in the 21st century. Science 340:1177–78 [Google Scholar]
  35. Flannery KV. 1998. The ground plans of archaic states. Archaic States GM Feinman, J Marcus 15–57 Santa Fe, NM: Sch. Am. Res. Press [Google Scholar]
  36. Flannery KV. 2002. The origins of the village revisited: from nuclear to extended households. Am. Antiq. 67:3417–33 [Google Scholar]
  37. Heilen M, Altschul JH. 2013. The accuracy and adequacy of in-field artifact analysis. Adv. Archaeol. Pract. Nov:121–38 [Google Scholar]
  38. Hodder I, Orton C. 1976. Spatial Analysis in Archaeology London: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  39. Huff D. 1954. How to Lie With Statistics New York: Norton [Google Scholar]
  40. Inomata T, Ortiz R, Arroyo B, Robinson EJ. 2014. Chronological revision of Preclassic Kaminaljuyú, Guatemala: implications for social processes in the Southern Maya Area. Latin Am. Antiq. 25:4337–408 [Google Scholar]
  41. Iversen GR. 1984. Bayesian Statistical Inference Beverley Hills, CA: Sage [Google Scholar]
  42. Kruschke JK. 2014. Doing Bayesian Data Analysis New York: Elsevier, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  43. Lokaj J, Chiarelli JA, Cowgill GL. 1986. The Reliability of Surface Collecting at Teotihuacan Presented at Annu. Meet. Soc. Am. Archaeol., New Orleans [Google Scholar]
  44. McGrayne SB. 2011. The Theory That Would Not Die: How Bayes' Rule Cracked the Enigma Code, Hunted Down Russian Submarines, and Emerged Triumphant from Two Centuries of Controversy New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  45. Milne AA. 1926. Winnie-the-Pooh London: Methuen [Google Scholar]
  46. Ortman SG, Varien MD, Gripp TL. 2007. Empirical Bayesian methods for archaeological survey data: an application from the Mesa Verde Region. Am. Antiq. 72:2241–72 [Google Scholar]
  47. Ossa AE. 2013. Using network expectations to identify multiple exchange systems: a case study from Postclassic Sauce and its Hinterland in Veracruz, Mexico. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 32:415–32 [Google Scholar]
  48. Overholtzer L. 2015. Agency, practice, and chronological context: a Bayesian approach to household chronologies. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 37:37–47 [Google Scholar]
  49. Peterson CE, Drennan RD. 2005. Communities, settlements, sites, and surveys: regional-scale analysis of prehistoric human interaction. Am. Antiq. 70:15–30 [Google Scholar]
  50. Robertson IG. 1999. Spatial and multivariate analysis, random sampling error, and analytical noise: empirical Bayesian methods at Teotihuacan, Mexico. Am. Antiq. 64:137–52 [Google Scholar]
  51. Robertson IG. 2001. Mapping the social landscape of an early urban center: socio-spatial variation in Teotihuacan PhD Diss., Dep. Anthropol., Ariz. State Univ., Tempe [Google Scholar]
  52. Robinson WS. 1951. A method for chronologically ordering archaeological deposits. Am. Antiq. 16:293–301 [Google Scholar]
  53. Schiffer MB. 1976. Behavioral Archeology New York: Academic [Google Scholar]
  54. Shennan SJ. 1997. Quantifying Archaeology Iowa City: Univ. Iowa Press [Google Scholar]
  55. Spaulding AC. 1953. Statistical techniques for the discovery of artifact types. Am. Antiq. 18:4305–13 [Google Scholar]
  56. Spencer CS, Redmond EM. 2006. Resistance strategies and early state formation in Oaxaca, Mexico. Intermediate Elites in Pre-Columbian States and Empires CM Elson, RA Covey 21–43 Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press [Google Scholar]
  57. Tufte ER. 1983. The Visual Display of Quantitative Data Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press [Google Scholar]
  58. Willey GR. 1953. Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Virú Valley, Peru Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst. [Google Scholar]
  59. Yates RDS. 1997. The city state in ancient China. The Archaeology of City-States: Cross Cultural Approaches DL Nichols, TH Charlton 71–90 Washington, DC: Smithson. Inst. [Google Scholar]
  60. Yoffee N, Cowgill GL. 1988. The Collapse of Ancient States and Civilizations Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press [Google Scholar]
  61. Zeidler JA, Buck CE, Litton CD. 1998. Integration of archaeological phase information and radiocarbon results from the Jama River Valley, Ecuador: a Bayesian approach. Latin Am. Antiq. 9:2160–79 [Google Scholar]
  62. Zipf GK. 1949. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley [Google Scholar]
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error