METHODS IN

ANTHROPOLOGY
ANA 315
MS LIEBENBERG
Learning Objectives
• By the end of this lecture you should be able to
:
• Discuss the Daubert criteria for expert witness tes
timony
• Critically evaluate the methods section in a scienti
fic paper
• Discuss sample selection in an anthropological st
udy
• Discuss the concept of peer-review
• Scientific journal, analyses
• Discuss the composition of the Pretoria Bone Coll
ection
Classify th
e ancestry
of the skull
Classify the ancestry of the sk
ull

Is this valid?

Is this reliable?
With skeletal analyses…
• How do we know when to use which meth
od?
• What methods can we trust?
• How do you know when you are right?
• How do you argue your case against som
eone with 20 years of experience?
• “Because I said so!”
• “Trust me, I’m a doctor”

WHAT ARE OUR STANDARDS?

Old-school Anthro
• Example: Harvard list
• List of traits for “race determination”
• Taken from Iscan et al. (2000) ► Modified fr
om Krogman and Iscan (1986) ►Taken fro
m Hooton (1930’s) ► Modified from Linnae
us (1700’s)
• Foundation of anthropology
• “Soft science”
 Turning the Tables
• Daubert v. Merrel Dow Pharmaceuticals (199
3)
• Plaintiffs claimed drug caused birth defects
in their child
• Scientific experts were hired to testify for b
oth the plaintiffs and the defendants
• Court ruled in favour of Merrel Dow due to i
nsufficient / insubstantial evidence in supp
ort of the plaintiffs
• Some scientific experts for the plaintiffs are
now considered “quacks” because of faulty
methods and unsupported conclusions
 The Fallout
• Following Daubert case forensic science on
e of the fields that were scrutinized
• Analyses can no longer be based on “years
of experience”
• “Because I said so!”
• Needed to look into practitioner error
• May have been doing it for 20 years, but we
re you doing it correctly?
• Needed to ensure that methods are valid, tra
nsparent and reliable

Turns out Anthropologists have been using unreliable traits and

methods of uncertain validity perpetuated by oral tradition for a
long time…
The Daubert criteria
• Guidelines for expert witness testimony
• Following the criteria testimony should:
• Be testable Solid methodology

• Be peer-reviewed Someone else tested it

Tested and it
• Have established standards
works in SA
• Have known error-rates How accurate is it?

• Be accepted by the scientific community

• How do we fix the field? Other scientists also think
it is a good idea
• Proper training and method validation
 Best practice: Samples
•Need known demographic data
•Large enough sample (±3m)
• If sample too small it gives unrealistic results
• “Overfitting of data”
• Representative of population
• Is the formulae population-specific?
• E.g. for South Africans
• Temporality
• Are modern and historic individuals comparabl
e?
• Secular trends
– E.g. increase in stature of South African populati
on
Best practice: Methods
•Precision and repeatability testing
• Intra-observer agreement - test/measurement
done by you + you again at later time
• Are you consistent with yourself? Do you kno
w what you are measuring?
• Inter-observer agreement - test/measurement
done by you + someone else
• Are you consistent with others? Is the method
repeatable?
•Clear instructions
• Better definitions of traits, measurements
• Drawings
Best practice: Methods
•Robust statistics
• Hypothesis tests (significance)
• Classification with error-rates (% correct)
• Multivariate analyses
• Need to look at multiple traits/measurements at th
e same time
Easier said than done?
•Limitations to anthropological studies
• Availability of specimens
• E.g. Pretoria Bone Collection
– Modern black and white South African adu
lts
– No coloured or Indian South Africans
– No children (with known data)
– Skewed age ranges
• Ethical issues
• Scans of patients, children, trauma etc.
• Difficulty conducting statistics
How is this going to be i
n the test?
•Discuss the Daubert criteria

•Describe a method. Does it meet the D

aubert requirements? Why/why not?

•Evaluate the following the abstract an

d answer the questions pertaining to t
he materials and methods
• E.g. is sample big enough? Is s
ample representative?
- END OF LECTURE -