Cited by 85Archaeological Research and ProtectionArchaeological and Geological StudiesHistorical and Cultural Archaeology Studies

Assessing the state of archaeological GIS research: Unbinding analyses of past landscapes

Howey, Meghan C.L., Brouwer Burg, Marieka·2017·Journal of Archaeological Science

Abstract

The early pioneers of archaeological Geographic Information Systems (GIS) advocated for a future where this technology was more than a data-management tool. To this end, they emphasized harnessing the analytic power of GIS to advance innovative understandings of past social landscapes. This paper introduces the special issue, explaining its aims to offer a current assessment of how this vision has been realized. Three themes related to both persistent questions and emergent horizons in archaeological GIS are explored in the context of the contributions. We present our own set of ideas for how to unbind our analyses from some of the methodological and conceptual constraints inherent in the analytic GIS approaches on which we have long relied to explore past landscapes. We argue it is important to keep moving beyond analytic approaches tethered to discrete points, to push forward geospatial modeling of cultural processes across entire landscapes, and to incorporate uncertainty and iteration directly into our work. Through such efforts, we can develop robust insights into the ways past communities considered, reconfigured, and renewed patterns of social, economic, and ideological interaction, flow, and circulation through the variegated landscapes they inhabited. In doing this, we will get closer to realizing the ambitious vision early pioneers had for archaeological GIS – a technology they believed could let us ask entirely new questions about the past.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jas.2017.05.002

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Krist, 1994, GIS modeling of paleo-indian period caribou migrations and viewsheds in northeastern lower Michigan, Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens., 60, 1129

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Howey, M. C. L., & Brouwer Burg, M.
Affiliations
University of New Hampshire (US)
Corresponding author
Howey, Meghan C.L.
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
84
Pages
1-9
ISSN
0305-4403 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2614757222
Cited by
85
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11
FWCI
20.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Archaeological Science (publishedVersion)
  • University of New Hampshire Scholars Repository (University of New Hampshire at Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
American Council of Learned Societies
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Space and Planetary Science › Archaeological Research and Protection
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Archaeological and Geological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Historical and Cultural Archaeology Studies
Keywords
archaeological GIS, past landscapes, social landscape, geospatial modeling, cultural processes, uncertainty, iterative analysis, landscape archaeology

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