The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons
Abstract
Introduction Estimating the ages of skeletons is an essential part of any osteologist's job, regardless of whether the skeletons come from forensic or archaeological contexts. The ages of juvenile skeletons can usually be estimated with minimal bias and an acceptable range of error, although even this endeavor is not entirely free from problems. But the situation is far worse when one is dealing with the skeletons of adults. Here a number of serious osteological and statistical problems plague the process of estimating an individual's age-at-death (see Bocquet-Appel and Masset 1982; Boldsen 1988; Masset 1989; Jackes 1992, 2000; Konigsberg and Frankenberg 1992, 1994; Milner et al . 2000). Among these difficulties is the tendency of age estimates to mimic the structure of the known-age reference samples used as standards of calibration (a problem often called “age mimicry”) and an inability to estimate the ages of older skeletons (those greater than about 50 years of age). The Rostock protocol outlined in the present volume represents a step toward a solution of these problems. In particular, the strategy of estimating the entire age-at-death distribution f ( a ) before trying to estimate the age of any individual skeleton is an important, if at first somewhat counterintuitive, innovation. However, the strategy has one serious practical shortcoming: the target population has to be large enough to provide good estimates of f ( a ). Many archaeological skeletal samples examined by paleodemographers are simply too few in number to proceed in this manner.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Using the Acetabulum to Estimate Age at Death of Adult Males*
Rissech, C., Estabrook, G. F., Cunha, E., & Malgosa, A. (2006) · Journal of Forensic Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00060.x · Cited by 143
A new method to estimate adult age‐at‐death using the acetabulum
Calce, S. E. (2012) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.22026 · Cited by 90
Godde, K., & Hens, S. M. (2012) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.22126 · Cited by 77
Multi-omic detection of Mycobacterium leprae in archaeological human dental calculus
Fotakis, A. K., Denham, S. D., Mackie, M., Orbegozo, M. I., Mylopotamitaki, D., Gopalakrishnan, S., Sicheritz-Pontén, T., Olsen, J. V., Cappellini, E., Zhang, G., et al. (2020) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2019.0584 · Cited by 58
Estimating the distribution of probable age‐at‐death from dental remains of immature human fossils
Shackelford, L. L., Stinespring Harris, A. E., & Konigsberg, L. W. (2012) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.21639 · Cited by 55
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Boldsen, J. L., Milner, G. R., Konigsberg, L. W., & Wood, J. W.
- Venue
- Paleodemography
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2002-01-03
- Pages
- 73-106
- OpenAlex
- W1553439038
- Cited by
- 494
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 60.33
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511542428.005
- The paper
- Boldsen, J. L., Milner, G. R., Konigsberg, L. W., & Wood, J. W. (2002). Transition analysis: a new method for estimating age from skeletons. Paleodemography. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511542428.005
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.