The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act: The Death Knell for Scientific Study?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Destructive analysis of skeletal remains is a highly sensitive topic for many repatriation committees and institutions holding skeletal remains.
“Destructive analysis of skeletal remains is a highly sensitive topic for many repatriation committees and institutions holding skeletal remains (Dongoske, 1996; Killion and Molloy, 1999; Kosslak, 1999; O'Rourke et al., 2005; Cast et al., 2010)”
From Successful enrichment and recovery of whole mitochondrial genomes from ancient human dental calculus (2016) · cites this paper as Kosslak, 1999
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Successful enrichment and recovery of whole mitochondrial genomes from ancient human dental calculus
Ozga, A. T., Nieves‐Colón, M. A., Honap, T. P., Sankaranarayanan, K., Hofman, C. A., Milner, G. R., Lewis, C. M., Stone, A. C., & Warinner, C. (2016) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.22960 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
“…is a highly sensitive topic for many repatriation committees and institutions holding skeletal remains (Dongoske, 1996; Killion and Mol-loy, 1999; Kosslak, 1999; O’Rourke et al., 2005; Cast et al., 2010), and thus there is a great need for identifying alternative sources and methods for…”
- Authors
- Kosslak, R. M.
- Corresponding author
- Kosslak, Renee M.
- Venue
- American Indian Law Review
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 129
- ISSN
- 0094-002X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2799306849
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2022: 8 · 2021: 1 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Indian Law Review (publishedVersion)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law - Digital Commons (University of Oklahoma) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Law › Indigenous Peoples' Rights and Law
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Indigenous Cultures and History
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology › Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies
- Keywords
- NAGPRA, repatriation, human remains, cultural property, Native American burial sites, federal Indian law
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
