Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T05:20:51.661Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Measuring Archaeological Diversity: An Application of the Jackknife Technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Daniel Kaufman
Daniel Kaufman*
Affiliation:
Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa 31905, Israel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The jackknife technique is applied here to measures of diversity in an archaeological context. As described, the technique requires no assumptions about the underlying structure of the data being analyzed and, thus, is offered as an alternative to simulation and regression approaches. Most important, with jackknifing it is possible to attach statistical significance to differences in diversity, allowing for more meaningful comparisons between archaeological assemblages.

Résumé

Résumé

La técnica jacknife es aplícada aquipara medir diversidad en un contexto arqueológico. Así descrita, la técnica no requiere presupuestos sobre la infraestructura de los datos analizados y, por lo tanto, presenta una alternativa para los análisis de regresión y simulación. Lo que es más importante, con esta técnica uno puede calcular el nivel de significación estadístico para las diferencias en diversidad, posibilitando así una comparación más significativa entre conjuntos arqueológicos.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , January 1998 , pp. 73 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Adams, J. E., and McCune, E. D. 1979 Application of the Generalized Jack-Knife to Shannon's Measure of Information Used as an Index of Diversity. In Ecological Diversity in Theory and Practice, edited by Grassle, J. F., G. P. Patil, , Smith, W., and Taille, C., pp. 117–131. International Cooperative Publishing House, Fairland, Maryland.Google Scholar
Bar-Yosef, O. 1973 Nahal Ein Gev I: Preliminary Report. Mitekufat Haeven 11: 1–7. Israel Prehistoric Society.Google Scholar
Binford, L. 1980 Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation Processes. American Antiquity 45: 4–20.Google Scholar
Bobrowsky, P. T, and Ball, B. F. 1989 The Theory and Mechanics of Ecological Diversity in Archaeology. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 4–12. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Conkey, M. W. 1980 The Identification of Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Aggregation Sites: The Case of Altamira. Current Anthropology 21: 609–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conkey, M. W. 1989 The Use of Diversity in Stylistic Analysis. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 118–129. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cowgill, G. L. 1989 The Concept of Diversity in Archaeological Theory. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 131–141. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dunnell, R. C. 1989 Diversity in Archaeology: A Group of Measures in Search of Application? In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 142–149. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fager, E. W. 1972 Diversity: A Sampling Study. American Naturalist 106: 293–310.Google Scholar
Ferring, R. 1977 The Late Upper Paleolithic site of Ein Aqev East. In Prehistory and Paleoenvironments in the Central Negev, Israel, vol. II, edited by Marks, A. E., pp. 81–111. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
Gilead, I. 1981 Upper Paleolithic Tool Assemblages from the Negev and Sinai. In Prehistoire du Levant, edited by Cauvin, J. and Sanlaville, P., pp. 331–342. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.Google Scholar
Goring-Morris, N. 1980 Late Quaternary Sites in Wadi Fazael, Lower Jordan Valley. Unpublished Master's thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
Grayson, D. K. 1984 Quantitative Zooarchaeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Heltshe, J. F, and Bitz, D. W. 1979 Comparing Diversity Measures in Sampled Communities. In Ecological Diversity in Theory and Practice, edited by Grassle, J. F, Patil, G. P., Smith, W., and Taille, C., pp. 133–144. International Cooperative Publishing House, Fairland, Maryland.Google Scholar
Jones, G. T, Grayson, D. K., and Beck, C. 1983 Artifact Class Richness and Sample Size in Archaeological Surface Assemblages. In Lulu Linear Punctuated: Essays in Honor of George Irving Quimby, edited by Dunnell, R. C. and Grayson, D.K. pp. 55–73. Anthropological Papers No. 72. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. 1981 The Late Upper Paleolithic of the Levant: An Analysis of the Lithic Assemblages. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. 1987 Interassemblage Variability of Metric Attributes from Lithic Assemblages of the Late Upper Paleolithic of Israel. Mitekufat Haeven 20: 37–49. Israel Prehistoric Society.Google Scholar
Kaufman, D. 1988 Lithic Assemblages and Settlement Patterns of the Late Upper Paleolithic of Israel. Mitekufat Haeven 21: 7–19. Israel Prehistoric Society.Google Scholar
Kintigh, K. W. 1984 Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with Simulated Assemblages. American Antiquity 49: 44–54.Google Scholar
Kintigh, K. W. 1989 Sample Size, Significance, and Measures of Diversity. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 25–36. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
McCartney, P. H., and Glass, M. F. 1990 Simulation Models and the Interpretation of Archaeological Diversity. American Antiquity 55: 521–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magurran, A. E. 1988 Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton. New Jersey.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, A. E. 1976 Ein Aqev: A Late Levantine Upper Paleolithic Site in the Nahal Aqev. In Prehistory and Paleoenvironments in the Central Negev, Israel, vol. I, edited by Marks, A. E., pp. 227–292. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
Marks, A. E. 1981 The Upper Paleolithic of the Negev. In Prehistoire du Levant, edited by Cauvin, J. and Sanlaville, P., pp. 343–352. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.Google Scholar
Marks, A. E., and Freidel, D. A. 1977 Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in the Avdat/Aqev Area. In Prehistory and Paleoenvironments in the Central Negev, Israel, vol. II, edited by Marks, A. E., pp. 131–158. Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, Texas.Google Scholar
May, R. M. 1981 Patterns in Multi-Species Communities. In Theoretical Ecology: Patterns and Applications, edited by May, R. M., pp. 197–227. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Menhinick, E. F. 1964 A Comparison of Some Species-Individuals Diversity Indices Applied to Samples of Field Insects. Ecology 45: 859–861.Google Scholar
Miller, R. G., Jr. 1974 The Jackknife—A Review. Biometrika 61: 1–15.Google Scholar
Miller, R. G., Jr. 1986 Beyond Anova, Basics of Applied Statistics. John Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Patil, G. P., and Taillie, C. 1979 A Study of Diversity Profiles and Orderings for a Bird Community in the Vicinity of Colstrip, Montana. In Contemporary Quantitative Ecology and Related Ecometrics, edited by Patil, G. P. and Rosenzweig, M., pp. 23–48. International Co-operative Publishing House, Fairland.Google Scholar
Quenouille, M. H. 1956 Notes on Bias in Estimation. Biometrika 43: 368–386.Google Scholar
Rindos, D. 1989 Diversity, Variation, and Selection. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 13–23. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rhode, D. 1988 Measurement of Archaeological Diversity and the Sample-Size Effect. American Antiquity 53: 708–716.Google Scholar
Rothschild, N. A. 1989 The Effect of Urbanization on Faunal Diversity: A Comparison between New York City and St Augustine, Florida, in the Sixteenth to Eighteenth Centuries. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 92–99. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Simek, J. F. 1989 Structure and Diversity in Intrasite Spatial Analysis. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 59–68. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Streuver, S. 1971 Comments on Archaeological Data Requirements and Research Strategy. American Antiquity 36: 9–19.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. H. 1969 Figuring Anthropology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. H. 1988 The Archaeology of Monitor Valley: 3. Survey and Additional Excavations. Anthropological Papers 66(2). American Museum of Natural History, New York.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. H. 1989 Diversity in Hunter-Gatherer Cultural Geography. In Quantifying Diversity in Archaeology, edited by Leonard, R. D. and Jones, G.T. pp. 85–91. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Tukey, J. W. 1958 Bias and Confidence in Not-Quite-Large Samples (abstract). Annals of Mathematical Statistics 29: 614.Google Scholar
Whittaker, R. H. 1972 Evolution and Measurement of Species Diversity. Taxon 21: 213–251.Google Scholar
Zahl, S. 1977 Jack-knifing an Index of Diversity. Ecology 58: 907–913.Google Scholar