Cited by 522Posthumanist Ethics and ActivismAnthropological Studies and InsightsMarxism and Critical Theory

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Materiality: An Introduction

Miller, Daniel·2005·Materiality

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1215/9780822386711-001

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?

  • Debates about the power of things are central to Latour's theories, and anthropologists such as Kopytoff, Gell, Miller, Ingold and Hodder have long discussed them.

    “Likewise, while debates about the power of things are central to Latour ' s theories, anthropologists such as Igor Kopytoff (1986), Alfred Gell (1998), Daniel Miller (2005), Tim Ingold (2011) and archaeologists like Ian Hodder (2012) have long discussed them.”

    From Bruno Latour and the anthropology of the moderns (2013) · cites this paper as Miller 2005

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Miller, D.
Corresponding author
Miller, Daniel
Venue
Materiality
Published
2005
Pages
1-50
OpenAlex
W2478339902
Cited by
521
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 58 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 46 · 2012: 27
FWCI
126.00
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Duke University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Cultural Studies › Posthumanist Ethics and Activism
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Anthropological Studies and Insights
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Marxism and Critical Theory
Keywords
materiality

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