Cited by 60

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Spatial Analysis of Visible Areas from the Bronze Age Cairns of Mull

Fisher, Peter, Farrelly, Chris, Maddocks, Adrian, Ruggles, Clive·1997·Journal of Archaeological Science

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/jasc.1996.0142

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Fisher et al.'s use of stratified random sampling supports the argument that the desire to overlook sea was a causal rather than coincidental factor in cairn location.

    “Specifically, their use of stratified random sampling to demonstrate that the proportion of sea in the cairn viewsheds was higher than expected by chance, even among locations similarly close to the sea, supports the argument that the desire to overlook sea was a causal rather than coincidental factor in cairn location.”

    From Visibility Studies in Archaeology: A Review and Case Study (2003) · cites this paper as Fisher et al. (1997)

  • Madry and Crumley fail to establish that the visibility of Iron Age roads from hillforts is unexpected.

    “as Fisher et al. (1997, p.583) observe, Madry and Crumley (1990, pp.375-376) fail to establish that the visibility of Iron Age roads from hillforts is unexpected”

    From Visibility Studies in Archaeology: A Review and Case Study (2003) · cites this paper as Fisher et al. (1997, p.583)

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Fisher, P., Farrelly, C., Maddocks, A., & Ruggles, C.
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-07
Volume
24
Issue
7
Pages
581-592
ISSN
0305-4403
Cited by
60
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review