The Scientific Method in Paleolithic Archaeology

Summary

This is an abstract from the "Establishing the Science of Paleolithic Archaeology: The Legacy of Harold Dibble (1951–2018) Part II" session, at the 88th annual meeting of the Society for American Archaeology.

Paleoanthropological hypotheses are often qualitatively different from questions asked by scientists studying the evolution of other living groups. They are frequently complex and very specific. Rather than seeking to illuminate basic evolutionary processes and mechanisms, they focus on precisely reconstructing events in human prehistory. They are often driven, at least in part, by public interest. These characteristics can enhance paleoanthropological studies because they foster novel research approaches, but they may also encourage the formulation of hypotheses that are essentially untestable given the available data. Perhaps for these reasons, explicit hypotheses are sometimes omitted or never clearly stated in paleoanthropological research papers, and many studies are essentially inductive or descriptive. Building on a pilot study, we conducted a survey of Paleolithic projects published in archaeological journals since 2000. We evaluated each study according to three criteria: (1) Is an explicit hypothesis stated? (2) Can the hypothesis be tested given the data that were examined? (3) Do the methods used in the study adequately test the hypothesis? We present chronological trends throughout the study period and compare results for different journals. We conclude with a discussion of the nature of Paleolithic archaeological studies and their status as a hypotheticodeductive discipline.

This Resource is Part of the Following Collections

• Establishing the Science of Paleolithic Archaeology: The Legacy of Harold Dibble (1951–2018) Part II   •
• Society for American Archaeology 88th Annual Meeting, Portland, OR (2023)

Keywords

Record Identifiers

Abstract Id(s): 36862.0