CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 80Archaeology and ancient environmental studiesGeographies of human-animal interactionsHuman-Animal Interaction Studies

Working at relationships: another look at animal domestication

O'Connor, T. P.·1997·Antiquity
DOI 10.1017/s0003598x00084635
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

‘Animals were wild, and then some of them were tamed and so became domestic.’ The archaeological definition of ‘domestic’ is a fundamental, alongside the means by which the domestic is to be recognized in the archaeological record. Setting that relationship with human beings which we call ‘domestication’ alongside other relations between species clarifies the issues.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0003598x00084635

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Commensal and mutualistic processes can lead to domestication, whereby both the domesticator and domesticated species seek out and benefit from cohabitation.

    “A broad consensus is now emerging that “commensal” and “mutualistic” processes can lead to domestication [6, 9–11], whereby both the domesticator and domesticated species seek out and benefit from cohabitation;”

    From Self-domestication in Homo sapiens: Insights from comparative genomics (2017) · cites this paper as [6]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
O'Connor, T. P.
Affiliations
University of Bradford (GB)
Corresponding author
O'Connor, T. P.
Venue
Antiquity
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
1997-03
Volume
71
Issue
271
Pages
149-156
ISSN
  • 0003-598X (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-1744
DOI
10.1017/s0003598x00084635
OpenAlex
W2167026021
Cited by
80
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 6516 d)
Locations
Antiquity (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
  • Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Geographies of human-animal interactions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
Keywords
animal domestication, human-animal relations, interspecies interactions, taming, wildlife, human-animal interaction

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