The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Considerations for Collecting Freelists in the Field: Examples from Ethobotany
Abstract
In freelists, informants create an inventory of all the items they know within a given category. Freelists reveal cultural salience and variation in individuals’ topical knowledge. The ease and accuracy of freelist interviewing makes it ideal for collecting data on local knowledge from relatively large samples. This method, however, does not work well with broad topical areas: People tend to omit some items and cluster responses as they unpack mental subcategories. Successive freelisting can reduce and redefine topics (domains), thus focusing the content of interviews. In oral freelists, interviewers should prevent bystanders from contaminating the informant’s list, and written freelists are advisable in literate communities. Responses from freelists should be cross-checked with informal methods as much as practicable, as in this Caribbean case. With proper attention to detail, freelisting can amass high-quality ethnobotanical data.
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
Cites
Corfman, K. P., & Lynch, J. G. (1983) · University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) · Cited by 2,944
Weller, S., & Romney, A. (1988) · Sage eBooks · doi:10.4135/9781412986069 · Cited by 1,186
Berlin, B. (1992) · Princeton University Press eBooks · doi:10.1515/9781400862597 · Cited by 1,149
Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology
(1999) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.36-4846 · Cited by 1,066
(1955) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1955.tb38334.x · Cited by 879
Selected Guidelines for Ethnobotanical Research: A Field Manual
Alexiades, M. N., & Sheldon, J. W. (1996) · Cited by 853
A psychological study of the semantics of animal terms
Henley, N. M. (1969) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(69)80058-7 · Cited by 285
Cognitive Aspects of English Kin Terms
ROMNEY, A. K., & D'ANDRADE, R. G. (1964) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1964.66.3.02a00870 · Cited by 270
Elicitation techniques for cultural domain analysis
Borgatti, S. P. (1999) · UKnowledge (University of Kentucky) · Cited by 225
From the Fat of Our Souls: Social Change, Political Process, and Medical Pluralism in Bolivia
Crandon‐Malamud, L. (1991) · University of California Press eBooks · doi:10.1525/9780520914452 · Cited by 154
Cited by
Ethnopharmacological field studies: A critical assessment of their conceptual basis and methods
Heinrich, M., Edwards, S., Moerman, D. E., & Leonti, M. (2009) · Journal of Ethnopharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.jep.2009.03.043 · Cited by 398
Contingent Diversity on Anthropic Landscapes
Balée, W. (2010) · Diversity · doi:10.3390/d2020163 · Cited by 55
Martinez Tyson, D. (., Castañeda, H., Porter, M., Quiroz, M., & Carrion, I. (2011) · Depression Research and Treatment · doi:10.1155/2011/564396 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Quinlan, M.
- Venue
- Field Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 219-234
- ISSN
- 1064-8631 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-822X
- 1552-3969
- OpenAlex
- W2140175446
- Cited by
- 369
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 4.21
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Considerations for Collecting Freelists in the Field: Examples from Ethobotany. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1525822x05277460
- The paper
- Quinlan, M. (2005). Considerations for Collecting Freelists in the Field: Examples from Ethobotany. Field Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x05277460
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.
