Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:20:38.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Reliability and Validity of a Lithic Debitage Typology: Implications for Archaeological Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

William C. Prentiss
William C. Prentiss*
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, The University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sullivan and Rozen's (1985) debitage typology has been proposed as a method for measuring the effects of variation in lithic reduction by describing “distinctive assemblages.” This is in contrast to many traditional analytical methods oriented toward identifying the effects of lithic reduction techniques on individual flakes. Debate over the use of the typology has focused primarily on the ability of the typology to accurately measure variation in lithic reduction behavior, and secondarily on the role of experimental studies in archaeology. In this paper I present an analysis designed to estimate the reliability and validity of the typology. An experimental design is developed to permit data collection with minimal analyst induced random or systematic error. Principal components analysis and the coefficient theta demonstrate that the typology provides reliable or replicable results when applied to debitage assemblages of similar technological origin. Further principal components analysis suggests that the instrument is of limited utility in recognizing effects of variation in reduction activities associated with highly vitreous lithic raw materials. A means of expanding the typology and increasing its accuracy in archaeological pattern recognition is presented.

Résumé

Résumé

La tipología de los restos líticos de Sullivan y Rozen (1985) ha sido propuesta como un método por medir el efecto de la variabilidad en “reducción distintiva” de cada conjunto. Este mótodo contrasta con otros mátodos analitícos tradicionales, que están orientados a la identificción de los efectos de las técnicas de reducción lítica en las lascas individuates. El debate sobre los usos de la tipología se har enfocado primeramente en la abilidad de la tipología para de tectar exactamente la variación en el proceso de reducción lítica, y segundamente en elpapel de los estudios arqueológicos experimentales. En este artículo, presento un análisis diseñado para estimar la confiabilidad y validez de la tipología. Un diseho experimental estd desarollado para permitir lafue colleción de datos con un mmímo de errores inducidos casual y sistematicamente. La análisis de los componentes principales y el coeficiente theta demuestra que la tipología produce resultados confiables y reproducible cuando se aplica a conjuntos de restos de origen tecnico similar. El andlisis adicional de los componentes principales sugiere que la tipología es de utilidad limitada para reconocer los efectos de variación en actividades de reducción. Este papel amplía la tipologia y aumenta la precisión para reconocer patrones arqueológicos.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 63 , Issue 4 , October 1998 , pp. 635 - 650
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

Ahler, S. A. 1972 Mass Analysis of Flaking Debris. Abstracts of the 30th Annual Plains Anthropological Conference, Lincoln, Nebraska, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar
Ahler, S. A. 1989 Mass Analysis of Raking Debns: Studying the Forest Rather than the Tree. In Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, edited by Henry, D. O. and Odell, G.H. pp. 85–118. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association Number 1.Google Scholar
Amick, D. S. 1986 Calculating Artifact Planview Area. Lithic Technology 15: 90–95.Google Scholar
Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. 1989 Comments on Sullivan and Rozen's “Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation.” American Antiquity 54: 166–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. 1997 Effects of Raw Material on Flake Breakage Patterns. Lithic Technology 22: 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amick, D. S., Mauldin, R. P., and Binford, L. R. 1989 The Potential of Experiments in Lithic Technology. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 1–14. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Amick, D. S., Mauldin, R. P., and Tomka, S. A. 1988 An Evaluation of Debitage Produced by Bifacial Core Reduction of a Georgetown Chert Nodule. Lithic Technology 17: 26–36.Google Scholar
Armor, D. J. 1974 Theta Reliability and Factor Scaling. In Sociological Methodology, edited by Costner, H. L., pp. 17–50. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Austin, R. J. 1986 The Experimental Reproduction and Archaeological Occurrence of Biface Notching Flakes. Lithic Technology 15: 96–100.Google Scholar
Austin, R. J. 1998 Technological Characterization of Lithic Waste-Flake Assemblages: Multivariate Analysis of Experimental and Archaeological Data. Unpublished manuscript in possession of author.Google Scholar
Baumler, M. R, and Downum, C. E. 1989 Between Micro and Macro: A Study in the Interpretation of Small Sized Lithic Debitage. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 101–116. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Bradbury, A. and Carr, R J. 1995 Flake Typologies and Alternative Approaches: An Experimental Assessment. Lithic Technology 20: 100–115.Google Scholar
Burgess, R. J., and Kvamme, K. L. 1978 A New Technique for Measurement of Artifact Angles. American Antiquity 43: 482–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, J. 1980 Making Sense Out of Waste Flakes: New Methods for Investigating the Technology and Economics Behind Chipped Stone Assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science 7: 131–148.Google Scholar
Callahan, E. 1979 The Basics of Biface Knapping in the Eastern Fluted Point Tradition: A Manual for Flintknappers and Lithic Analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America 7: 1–180.Google Scholar
Carmines, E. G., and Zeller, R. A. 1979 Reliability and Validity Assessment. Sage University Paper 17, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Clark, J. E. 1984 Counterflaking and the Manufacture of Mesoamerican Prismatic Blades. Lithic Technology 13: 52–61.Google Scholar
Cotterell, B. and Kamminga, J. 1987 The Formation of Flakes. American Antiquity 52: 675–708.Google Scholar
Cowgill, G. L. 1970 Some Reliability and Validity Problems in Archaeology. In Archeologie et Calcateurs: Problemes Semiologiques et Mathematiques, pp. 161–175. Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
Crabtree, D. E. 1982 An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers of the Idaho Museum of Natural History, Number 28.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. 1951 Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests. Psychometrika 16: 297–334.Google Scholar
Dibble, H. L., and Bernard, M. C. 1980 A Comparative Study of Basic Edge Angle Measurement Techniques. American Antiquity 45: 877–885.Google Scholar
Dibble, H. L., and Whittaker, J. C. 1981 New Experimental Evidence on the Relation Between Percussion Flaking and Flake Variation. Journal of Archaeological Science 8: 283–296.Google Scholar
Ensor, H. B., and Roemer, E. 1989 Comments on Sullivan and Rozen's Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation. American Antiquity 54: 175–178.Google Scholar
Fish, P. R. 1978 Consistency in Archaeological Measurement and Classification: A Pilot Study. American Antiquity 43: 86–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. A. 1960 The Design of Experiments. Hafner Publishing Co., New York.Google Scholar
Fladmark, K. R. 1982 Microdebitage Analysis: Initial Considerations. Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 205–220.Google Scholar
Geib, P. R. 1992 Technological Inferences Based on Debitage Condition Categories. Unpublished manuscript in possession of author.Google Scholar
Greene, V. L., and Carmines, E. G. 1980 Assessing the Reliability of Linear Composites. In Sociological Methodology, edited by Schuessler, K. F., pp. 160–175. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Harry, K. G., Slaughter, M. C., and Denoyer, A. 1993 Experimenting with Raw Materials: How Accurate are Inferences Derived from Flake Completeness Categories? Paper presented at the 58th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis.Google Scholar
Hayden, B., and Hutchings, W. K. 1989 Whither the Billet Flake? In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 235–257. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Henry, D. O., Haynes, C. V., and Bradley, B. 1976 Quantitative Variations in Flaked Stone Debitage. Plains Anthropologist 21: 57–61.Google Scholar
Ingbar, E. E., Larson, M. L., and Bradley, B. A. 1989 A Nontypological Approach to Debitage Analysis. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 117–136. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Kim, J.O., and Mueller, C. W. 1978 Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues. Sage University Paper No. 14, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Kuijt, I., Prentiss, W. C., and Pokotylo, D. L. 1995 Bipolar Reduction: An Experimental Study of Debitage Variability. Lithic Technology 20: 116–127.Google Scholar
Kuijt, I., and Russell, K. W. 1993 Tur Imdai Rockshelter, Jordan: Debitage Analysis and Historic Bedouin Lithic Technology. Journal of Archaeological Science 20: 667–680.Google Scholar
Light, P., and Prentiss, W. C. 1993 Cultural Resource Evaluation of Two Archaeological Sites Along the Battle Park Road, Bighorn National Forest, Big Horn County, Wyoming. Report on file USDA Forest Service, Bighorn National Forest, Sheridan, Wyoming.Google Scholar
Magne, M. P. R. 1985 Lithics and Livelihood: Stone Tool Technologies of Central and Southern Interior British Columbia. National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper No. 133.Google Scholar
Magne, M., and Pokotylo, D. L. 1981 A Pilot Study in Bifacial Lithic Reduction Sequences. Lithic Technology 10: 34–37.Google Scholar
Mauldin, R. P., and Amick, D. S. 1989 Investigating Patterning in Debitage from Experimental Bifacial Core Reduction. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 67–88. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
McGuire, R. H. J., Whittaker, J., McGuire, M., and Swain, R. 1982 A Consideration of Observational Error in Lithic Use- Wear Analysis. Lithic Technology 11: 59–63. Montgomery, D. C. Google Scholar
McGuire, R. H. J., Whittaker, J., McGuire, M., and Swain, R. 1976 The Design and Analysis of Experiments. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
Morrow, C. A. 1984 A Biface Production Model for Gravel-Based Chipped Stone Industries. Lithic Technology 13: 20–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrow, T. A. 1997 A Chip Off The Old Block: Alternative Approaches to Debitage Analysis. Lithic Technology 22: 51–69.Google Scholar
Morrow, T. A. 1987 Reliability, Validity, and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology. In Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, edited by Aldenderfer, M., pp. 244–293. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Nance, J. D., and Ball, B. F. 1986 No Surprises? The Reliability and Validity of Test Pit Sampling. American Antiquity 51: 457–183.Google Scholar
Newcomer, M. H., and de G. Sieveking, G. 1980 Experimental Flake Scatter Patterns: A New Interpretive Technique. Journal of Field Archaeology 7: 345–352.Google Scholar
Odell, G. H. 1989 Experiments in Lithic Reduction. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 163–198. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Patterson, L. W. 1982 Replication and Classification of Large Sized Debitage. Lithic Technology 11: 50–59.Google Scholar
Patterson, L. W., and Sollberger, J. B. 1978 The Replication and Classification of Small Size Lithic Debitage. Plains Anthropologist 23: 103–112.Google Scholar
Prentiss, W. C. 1993 Hunter-Gatherer Economics and the Formation of a Housepit Floor Lithic Assemblage. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada.Google Scholar
Prentiss, W. C. 1995 Shoshone Municipal Pipeline Data Recovery Investigations at Site 48PA987, Park County, Wyoming. Report on file, USDI Bureau of Reclamation, North Platte River Projects Office, Mills, Wyoming.Google Scholar
Prentiss, W. C, and Romanski, E. J. 1989 Experimental Evaluation of Sullivan and Rozen's Debitage Typology. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 89–100. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Prentiss, W. C, Romanski, E. J., and Douthit, M. L. 1988 Hunter-Gatherer Land Use and Lithic Procurement in the Central Big Horn Basin, Wyoming. The Wyoming Archaeologist 31: 33–53.Google Scholar
Prentiss, W. C., Light, P. F., Welch, J. M., and Day, D. D. Jr. 1994 Lithic Debitage and Flake Tool Assemblage Formation at Two High Altitude Sites in Northern Wyoming. Paper presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Anaheim.Google Scholar
Rozen, K. C, and Sullivan, A. P. III 1989a Measurement, Method, and Meaning in Lithic Analysis: Problems with Amick and Mauldin's Middle Range Approach. American Antiquity 54: 169–174.Google Scholar
Rozen, K. C, and Sullivan, A. P. III 1989b The Nature of Lithic Reduction and Lithic Analysis: Stage Typologies Revisited. American Antiquity 54: 179–184.Google Scholar
Rummel, R. J. 1970 Applied Factor Analysis. Northwestern University Press, Evanston.Google Scholar
Schiffer, M. B., Skibo, J. M., Boelke, T. C., Neupert, M. A., 1994 New Perspectives on Experimental Archaeology: Surface Treatments and Thermal Response of the Clay Cooking Pot. American Antiquity 59: 197–218.Google Scholar
Schuessler, K. 1971 Analyzing Social Data: A Statistical Orientation. Houghton Mifflin, New York.Google Scholar
Shott, M. J. 1994 Size and Form in the Analysis of Flake Debris: Review and Recent Approaches. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 69–110.Google Scholar
Slaughter, M. 1993 Production and Use of Flaked Stone Artifacts from Los Hornos. In The Shadow of South Mountain: The Pre- Classic Hohokam of La Ciudad de los Hornos: 1991-1992 Excavations, edited by Chenault, M. L., R. V. N. Ahlstrom, and T. N. Motsinger, pp. 285–316. SWCA Environmental Consultants Archaeological Report No. 93-30, Tucson, Arizona.Google Scholar
Spector, P. E. 1981 Research Designs. Sage University Paper No. 23, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Speth, J. D. 1972 Mechanical Basis of Percussion Flaking. American Antiquity 37: 34–60.Google Scholar
Stahle, D. W. and Dunn, J. E. 1982 An Analysis and Application of Size Distribution of Waste Flakes from the Manufacture of Bifacial Stone Tools. World Archaeology 14: 84–97.Google Scholar
Sullivan, A. P. III 1987 Probing the Sources of Variability: A Regional Case Study near Homolovi Ruins, Arizona. North American Archaeologist 8: 41–71.Google Scholar
Sullivan, A. P. III 1995 Artifact Scatters and Subsistence Organization. Journal of Field Archaeology 22: 49–64.Google Scholar
Sullivan, A. P. III and Rozen, K. C. 1985 Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation. American Antiquity 50: 755–779.Google Scholar
Teltser, P. A. 1991 Generalized Core Technology and Tool Use: A Mississippian Example. Journal of Field Archaeology 18: 363–375.Google Scholar
Tomka, S. A. 1989 Differentiating Lithic Reduction Techniques: An Experimental Approach. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Amick, D. S. and Mauldin, R.P. pp. 137–162. BAR International Series 528.Google Scholar
Young, L. C, and Harry, K. G. 1989 A Preliminary Analysis of Temporal Changes in the Homol'ovi III Chipped Stone Assemblage. Kiva 54: 273–284.Google Scholar