|
All statistical computations utilized Chi Square programs from Social Science
Statistics, www.socscistatistics.com
2 By scientific convention, a p-value of .05 or less is statistically significant,
the patterned occurrence happening by chance only five times
out of 100. In this instance, the patterned occurrence is happening by chance
only 2.6 times out of 1,000, hence p = .0026. .
|
Archaeology is the study of artifacts (and much more), while the archaeology
of archaeology is a study of what the practitioners, professional and amateur,
do, a kind of meta-archaeology (Embree 1992). I look forward to each issue
of Central States Archaeological Journal (CSAJ) because I am informed about
archaeology and the archaeology of archaeology. Each article is an artifact
to be analyzed to reveal trends and patterns over time among the practitioners,
in the Central States Archaeological Societies, and in CSAJ itself.
Four issues of Central States Archaeological Journal (CSAJ) were selected
as a contemporary random sample of the journal. Since none were special issues
(like volume 67 (4), the Iowa 50th Anniversary Issue), there is no reason
to believe they are not representative of CSAJ. A content analysis of the
sample was conducted, with individual articles the unit of analysis. Several
variables were identified for each article, including authorship status
(professional/ amateur archaeologist), photographs and illustrations (black
and white/color), content of photographs and illustrations (complete artifacts/broken
artifacts).
All 84 articles from the four CSAJ issues were analyzed; 23 (27.4%) were
by professional archaeologists and 61 (72.6%) were by amateur archaeologists/collectors.
This departs from a randomized (50/50) authorship of half professionals
and half amateurs and is statistically significant (Chi Square (X2) = 9.059;
degrees of freedom (df) = 1; probability (p) = .0026) at the .05 level.2
Thus, CSAJ is a journal dominated by amateurs, but professionals contribute
more than 25% of the articles.
Of the 84 articles, 23 (27.4%) included b/w photographs/illustrations, and
61 (72.6%) included color photographs/illustrations. The predominance of
color over b/w, a departure from a random 50/50 distribution, is statistically
significant (X2 = 9.059; df = 1; p = .0026), declaring a preference for color
plates and illustrations. Until recently, the cost of color plates precluded
their use for most journals and books, but with digital technology, CSAJ
accommodates color to better inform readers.
Of the 23 professional articles, 21 included plates, 8 (38.1%) b/w, and
13 (61.9%) color. Of the 61 amateur articles, 15 (23.8%) included b/w, and
48 (76.2%) included color. The difference is not statistically significant,
but suggests professionals use (b&w) plates from historical/earlier archaeological
documents more frequently. Considering photographs/illustrations by author
group, professionals use a mean of 6.3 plates and amateurs use a mean of
5.0 plates, with no statistically significant difference. Both groups had
reason to illustrate the subject matter of their articles for the illumination
of readers. redictably, earlier issues of CJAS will have a predominance of
b/w plates, influenced by cost and technologies.
Of the 21 professional articles with plates, there were 86 (83.4%) complete
artifacts and 17 (16.5%) broken artifacts or fragments; of the 61 amateur
articles with plates, there were 1,254 (92.3%) complete artifacts and 105
(7.7%) fragments, with statistical significance (X2 = 9.6469; df = 1;
p = .001897). This suggests professionals value the intellectual information
of diagnostic artifact fragments, often from museums and institutional
collections, and amateurs prefer complete specimens as a matter of aesthetics
and collectability, often featuring specimens from personal collections.
Fragments are what rchaeologists often find in the field, and complete
specimens are what collectors acquire from the field, trade and purchase.
However, both groups would acknowledge that every artifact tells a story.
he few articles that were theoretical, conceptual or international were
almost exclusively by professional archaeologists. Because analysis reveals
professional involvement in the journal is substantial but not significant,
examination turns to the analysis of articles authored by amateurs, which
is more representative of the CSAJ.
Articles generally addressed a specific.....
Read the complete "An Empirical Analysis of CSAJ Authorship Professionals
and Amateurs" column
in the Central States Archaeological Societies 2022
April Journal which can be purchased on-line after March 2023
