The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 5 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
A Functional Analysis of Certain Chipped Stone Tools
Open accessAbstract
Abstract A Late Prehistoric period buffalo kill and butchering site in northern Wyoming (Site 48 JO 312) produced a large number of stone tools. Flakes removed in sharpening stone tools provided much of the interpretation of the activity that occurred at the site and in addition gave a number of ideas concerning tool use and sharpening.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Analysis of retouch ("sharpening") flakes from the Late Prehistoric Piney Creek bison kill and butchering site (48 JO 312) in northern Wyoming shows that five identifiable categories of flakes record stylized resharpening of bifaces, side scrapers, and end scrapers, and that these flakes often yield more information about site activities than the discarded tools themselves. Measurements of striking platforms allow estimates of how much tool width was lost per use-and-resharpening cycle and how many cycles a given tool underwent.
Key findings
- Five categories of retouch flakes were identified in the Piney Creek material: flakes of bifacial retouch; three categories of side-scraper retouch flakes (including flakes struck from the flat side of side scrapers, and subsequent conventional resharpening flakes); and end-scraper retouch flakes.
- By actual measurement, 100 flakes of bifacial retouch (all metamorphosed shales, the most common material at the site) had striking platforms of an average and median width of 2.2 mm; experiments suggested about 2.0 mm was the average width one biface edge was reduced per sharpening, with wear estimated at 1.0–2.0 mm, giving a total of 3.0–4.0 mm lost per edge per use-and-resharpening cycle.
- One biface (Fig. 2g) was estimated at about 75–80 mm wide when first broken and 46 mm wide when broken the last time and discarded; each blade edge was reduced between 14 and 17 mm, suggesting each edge may have been resharpened four or five times.
- At the site, "as much or more information, concerning activities performed there, was derived from the retouch flakes as from the tools"; in the kill area there was very little evidence of tool use in the form of actual tools, but retouch flakes demonstrated tool use commensurate with the operation.
Methods
- Excavation during the summers of 1964 and 1965 of a buffalo kill and butchering area along Piney Creek on the eastern flanks of the Big Horn Mountains, northern Wyoming; approximately 200 bison (*Bison bison*) were driven over a steep slope, with the kill area at the base and a butchering area about 300 ft. away. The operation is dated to around the latter part of the 16th century and represents a one-year operation, probably several drives within a drive season.
- Microscopic examination of unworked flakes, drawing on Bordes's (1961) concept of flakes of bifacial retouch, Semenov's (1964) ideas on use-wear traces, and Jelinek's (1965) notes on hard and soft hammer percussion; flakes were matched back into their flake scars on tools.
- Quantitative comparison of striking-platform widths of retouch flakes with experimental and observational estimates of edge reduction from wear and sharpening, applied to measurements of individual tools.
Limitations
- Stated by the paper: microscopic analysis is time consuming and the ability to recognize evidence of tool use is acquired with difficulty; straightforward interpretations may often be shown on only a small percentage of the total specimens; it is "as yet difficult to assign tool wear on a working edge to any specific function except within broad limits"; evidence is often difficult to photograph or otherwise preserve so that it can be seen and confirmed by others; and such analysis requires some background in the mechanics and use of simple tools.
- Stated by the paper: few end-scraper retouch flakes were recovered "due to the mesh size of the screens used in excavation," so that category is underrepresented in the sample.
- Evident from the text: the quantitative estimates of wear (1.0–2.0 mm) and of edge reduction per sharpening (about 2.0 mm) rest on experiments and comparisons rather than direct observation, and the paper itself notes the evidence comes from "a rather limited context," though it argues the results can be generalized.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 5 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Approximately 200 buffalo (Bison bison) were killed by driving them over a steep slope along a stream called Piney Creek.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The collection of retouch flakes is of a homogeneous nature which suggests several things.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A Late Prehistoric period buffalo kill and butchering site in northern Wyoming (Site 48 JO 312) produced a large number of stone tools.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“During the summers of 1964 and 1965, a buffalo kill and butchering area was excavated in northern Wyoming along the eastern flanks of the Big Horn Mountains (Frison 1967).”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
In the paper
“The first category is what Bordes (1961: 6) would call flakes of bifacial retouch which were removed from biface tools, lenticular in transverse cross section, that became dull through use.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bordes (1961: 6)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By actual measurement, 100 flakes of bifacial retouch, all of metamorphosed shales (the most common material at the site), have striking platforms of an average and median width of 2.2 mm.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The side-scraper retouch flakes were different from and distinguished from the first category by the fact that the striking platforms are part of the flat inner flake faces and constitute one side of the tools (Fig. 3a) and are usually at nearly a right angle to the adjacent portion of the back of the flake, which is the dulled edge of the tool (Fig. lb).”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Occasionally a ground edge or a polish or gloss that partially obscured the scalar retouch appeared, which suggests different functions of the tools in the category from which these flakes were removed.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At the Piney Creek site, as much or more information, concerning activities performed there, was derived from the retouch flakes as from the tools.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Within certain limits, there are five categories of retouch flakes or sharpening flakes that can be readily identified in the Piney Creek material and into which most of the unworked flake collection can be placed: One includes retouch flakes from bifaces; three include different retouch flakes from side scrapers; and one includes end-scraper retouch flakes.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Experiments suggested that about 2.0 mm. was the average width that one edge of a biface tool was reduced through removal of retouch flakes in a single sharpening process.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 22
- Probably not a substantial claim. 4
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another (Fig. 2/) was reduced in size after having been broken one time; but, after being broken at a later time, the largest piece of the tool was changed into an end scraper.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A third and much smaller category of retouch flakes are those that were removed from the flat side of side scrapers, which technically changed the side scraper into a biface tool but did not change its function.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two other tools are side scrapers (Fig. 2i, k) which were broken at an early stage, and continued use and resharpening reduced them in size but with little change in shape indicated.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The striking platforms of these flakes are usually faceted, and ridges between flake scars appear for they include a small part of one side of the biface tool (Fig. la).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the kill area there was very little evidence of tool use in the form of actual tools, but, by using the evidence from the retouch flakes, an amount of tool use commensurate with what would be expected from such an operation could be demonstrated.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Retouch flakes had no further utilitarian value and therefore remained where they were removed.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is good evidence to suggest that nearly every carcass was carefully butchered, and all bones that contained any significant amount of grease were broken.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Retouch flakes were found in the kill area; the broken tool was recovered in the butchering area.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedSingle caseTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All working edges of tools in their separate categories were at about the same stage of dullness when they were resharpened, indicating that a recognized point existed when it was necessary to sharpen a tool rather than continue with a dull one.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Often a fine scalar retouch is common on the working edges, but wear striations at right angles to the working edges are usually also visible under magnification.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, end scrapers in this collection were not as thick as the^gide scrapers; the flakes removed in the sharpening process were narrower and shorter, and they demonstrated smaller striking platforms than the other retouch flakes mentioned.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The amount the same edge of the tool was reduced through wear was estimated at from 1.0 to 2.0 mm., which suggests a total of 3.0 to 4.0 mm. that one edge of a biface tool was reduced in width through one cycle of use and resharpening.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be demonstrated (Fig. lc) that removal of a series of flakes from the flat side of side scrapers did not reduce the width of a tool and actually resulted in gaining one cycle in the use and sharpening process, provided the tool was thick enough to withstand thinning and not be structurally weakened in the process.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In both the kill and butchering areas of this site, known as the Piney Creek site (48 JO 312), nearly all the unworked flakes were relatively small, and they did not appear to have been the result of tool manufacture.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Materials used for manufacture of end scrapers are noticeably superior to those of other tools, and this could reflect different functions and also a greater tool value resulting from the added work of hafting.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“everything together suggests that, under the conditions that existed, the manufacturers were maximizing the amount of use in their tools and performing the job of butchering and preserving meat in such a way that choices were necessary, at points during the operation, which were made in the best interests of completing the job with the least expenditure of effort at the level of technology that”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is as yet difficult to assign tool wear on a working edge to any specific function except within broad limits!”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After removal of this series of retouch flakes, however, the tool was used to the extent that it was again dull and was ready to be resharpened when it was probably broken.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The next explanation was that they were somehow related to the activities performed at the site.”
Tests✗ Asserted: fails✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The tools, features, and bones in the butchering area suggest the purpose of this operation was to obtain, process, and preserve meat, probably for use during periods when food was scarce.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, in this particular context, the tools themselves did not provide a basis for a valid interpretation, which the retouch flakes did provide.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Retouch flakes had no further utilitarian value and therefore remained where they were removed.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The site represents a one-year operation, but the number of animals killed probably represents several different drives during the drive season.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were evidently cycles of use, and resharpening by very stylized processes.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Tools such as side scrapers, end scrapers, knives, and drills were continually modified throughout their lifetime of functional utility, and at the time when they were discarded or became nonfunctional, they were usually quite different than when originally completed.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The working edge of the retouch flake as shown under magnification (Fig. 3i) was dulled, apparently through use, and in this case there is a suggestion that removal of a conventional side-scraper retouch flake would have narrowed the tool excessively.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Obviously, speculation such as this could go on indefinitely, but the fact remains that the information offered by retouch flakes can result in better interpretations concerning tool use; and this will undoubtedly have its effects in other areas of interest as well.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“An Early Middle period bison kill in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming produced retouch flakes that gave a more valid interpretation of the activities at the site than the tools were able to offer (Frison 1968).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Frison 1968 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.
“Stone tools become dull rather quickly but are surprisingly effective if kept sharp and if their structural limitations are kept in mind.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Retouch flakes had no further utilitarian value and therefore remained where they were removed.
“The retouch flakes remained where they were removed as they had no further utilitarian value.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Side-scraper retouch flakes assigned different category numbers
MinorThe text assigns ordinary side-scraper retouch flakes to the second category, but the Figure 3 caption calls the typical side-scraper retouch flake category one. The first category is assigned to bifacial retouch flakes.
“The second category of retouch flakes includes those classified as side-scraper retouch flakes.”
“Figure: FIG. 3. a, enlarged view of striking platform of typical side-scraper retouch flake of category one;”
Citations
Cites
Toth, N. P., Blades, B. S., Wright, R. P., & Killick, D. J. (2015) · AccessScience · doi:10.1036/1097-8542.543250 · Cited by 399
The Piney Creek sites, Wyoming
Frbon, G. C. (1967) · Cited by 27
Lithic Technology Conference, Les Eyzies, France
Jelinek, A. J. (1965) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/2694000 · Cited by 22
Site 48SH312: An Early Middle Period Bison Kill in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming
Frison, G. C. (1968) · Plains Anthropologist · doi:10.1080/2052546.1968.11908483 · Cited by 13
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Bordes, 1961, Publications de I’Institut de I’Université de Bordeaux, Mémoire
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toward the Identification of Formation Processes
Schiffer, M. B. (1983) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279771 · Cited by 597
Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination
Shott, M. (1986) · Journal of Anthropological Research · doi:10.1086/jar.42.1.3630378 · Cited by 477
Middle paleolithic scraper reduction: Background, clarification, and review of the evidence to date
Dibble, H. L. (1995) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/bf02229003 · Cited by 360
Middle paleolithic symbolism: A review of current evidence and interpretations
Chase, P. G., & Dibble, H. L. (1987) · Journal of Anthropological Archaeology · doi:10.1016/0278-4165(87)90003-1 · Cited by 358
A New Synthesis of Middle Paleolithic Variability
Rolland, N., & Dibble, H. L. (1990) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/281279 · Cited by 340
Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation
Sullivan, A. P., & Rozen, K. C. (1985) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/280165 · Cited by 328
Chaine Operatoire; The Concept and Its Applications
Sellet, F. (1993) · Lithic Technology · doi:10.1080/01977261.1993.11720900 · Cited by 317
Stone tools and the evolution of human cognition
(2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-0962 · Cited by 236
Multiple approaches to the study of bifacial technologies
Soressi, M., & Dibble, H. L. (2003) · Leiden Repository (Leiden University) · Cited by 234
Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations, Economic Risk and Tool Design
Bousman, C. B. (1993) · Lithic Technology · doi:10.1080/01977261.1993.11720897 · Cited by 220
Size and form in the analysis of flake debris: Review and recent approaches
Shott, M. (1994) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/bf02229424 · Cited by 185
Major Fallacies Surrounding Stone Artifacts and Assemblages
Dibble, H. L., Holdaway, S., Lin, S. C. H., Braun, D. R., Douglass, M., Йовита, Р., McPherron, S. P., Olszewski, D. I., & Sandgathe, D. (2016) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-016-9297-8 · Cited by 183
The Effect of Hammer Mass and Velocity on Flake Mass
Dibble, H. L., & Pelcin, A. W. (1995) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1006/jasc.1995.0042 · Cited by 182
The formation of lithic assemblages
Barton, C. M., & Riel-Salvatore, J. G. (2014) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.03.031 · Cited by 156
Shea, J. J. (2012) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-012-9128-5 · Cited by 144
Haynes, C. V. (1969) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.166.3906.709 · Cited by 141
Dibble, H. L., & McPherron, S. P. (2006) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/506282 · Cited by 140
Late Pleistocene Technology, Economic Behavior, and Land-Use Dynamics in Southern Italy
Riel-Salvatore, J. G., & Barton, C. M. (2004) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/4128419 · Cited by 137
Bleed, P. (2001) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1023/a:1009526016167 · Cited by 135
Prehension and Hafting Traces on Flint Tools: A Methodology
Rots, V. (2010) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 131
Йовита, Р. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029029 · Cited by 130
Bousman, C. B. (2005) · Journal of Anthropological Archaeology · doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2005.05.001 · Cited by 123
New Clues to Stone Tool Function: Plant and Animal Residues
Briuer, F. L. (1976) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279013 · Cited by 123
Interpreting the Function of Stone Tools
Grace, R. (1989) · University of Michigan Press eBooks · doi:10.30861/9780860546085 · Cited by 118
Technique and methodology in microwear studies: A critical review
Keeley, L. H. (1974) · World Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00438243.1974.9979577 · Cited by 117
Origin and Early Development of Food-producing Cultures in Northeastern Africa
Krzyżaniak, L. (1981) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/202755 · Cited by 115
Ruebens, K. (2013) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2013.06.009 · Cited by 112
Excavations at Spirit Cave, North Thailand: Some Interim Interpretations
Gorman, C. F. (1972) · ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) · Cited by 105
Defining and measuring reduction in unifacial stone tools
Eren, M. I., Domínguez‐Rodrigo, M., Kuhn, S. L., Adler, D. S., Le, I., & Bar‐Yosef, O. (2005) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.03.003 · Cited by 104
Modeling Human Ecodynamics and Biocultural Interactions in the Late Pleistocene of Western Eurasia
Barton, C. M., Riel-Salvatore, J. G., Anderies, J. M., & Popescu, G. (2011) · Human Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10745-011-9433-8 · Cited by 104
Measuring reduction in stone tools: an ethnoarchaeological study of Gamo hidescrapers from Ethiopia
Shott, M., & Weedman, K. J. (2006) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2006.09.009 · Cited by 103
Functional Analysis of Flaked Stone Artifacts
Wilmsen, E. Ν. (1968) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/278517 · Cited by 103
Toward a “Quantitative Genetic” Approach to Lithic Variation
Lycett, S. J., & von Cramon‐Taubadel, N. (2013) · Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory · doi:10.1007/s10816-013-9200-9 · Cited by 101
Landscape-scale variation in hominin tool use: Evidence from the Developed Oldowan
Braun, D. R., Rogers, M., Harris, J. W. K., & Walker, S. J. (2008) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2008.05.020 · Cited by 99
Lin, S. C. H., Režek, Ž., Braun, D. R., & Dibble, H. L. (2013) · American Antiquity · doi:10.7183/0002-7316.78.4.724 · Cited by 93
The Interpretation of Middle Palaeolithic Variability
Rolland, N. (1981) · Man · doi:10.2307/2801973 · Cited by 92
Typology, Technology, and Chronology of Great Basin Dart Points
Flenniken, J. J., & Wilke, P. J. (1989) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1989.91.1.02a00100 · Cited by 91
Neanderthal Shell Tool Production: Evidence from Middle Palaeolithic Italy and Greece
Douka, K., & Spinapolice, E. E. (2012) · Journal of World Prehistory · doi:10.1007/s10963-012-9056-z · Cited by 88
Key, A., & Lycett, S. J. (2013) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2013.07.033 · Cited by 86
Stone artifacts and hominins in island Southeast Asia: New insights from Flores, eastern Indonesia
Moore, M. W., & Brumm, A. (2006) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2006.08.002 · Cited by 82
Lycett, S. J., Schillinger, K., Eren, M. I., von Cramon‐Taubadel, N., & Mesoudi, A. (2015) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.08.021 · Cited by 79
Addressing Prehistoric Hunting Practices Through Stone Tool Analysis
Odell, G. H. (1988) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1988.90.2.02a00060 · Cited by 77
Inference and Evidence in Archaeology: A Discussion of the Conceptual Problems
Sullivan, A. P. (1978) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-003101-6.50012-3 · Cited by 76
Twiss, K. C. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108670159 · Cited by 75
Buchanan, B., Mark Collard, A., Hamilton, M. J., & O’Brien, M. J. (2010) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.11.007 · Cited by 74
Comparing Stone Tool Resharpening Trajectories with the Aid of Elliptical Fourier Analysis
Йовита, Р. (2010) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6861-6_10 · Cited by 74
Archaeology of the Central Queensland Highlands: The Stone Component
Morwood, M. J. (1981) · Archaeology in Oceania/Archæology & physical anthropology in Oceania · doi:10.1002/j.1834-4453.1981.tb00001.x · Cited by 74
Prehistoric Stone Tools of Eastern Africa
Shea, J. J. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108334969 · Cited by 73
Ontogenetic scaling and lithic systematics: method and application
Йовита, Р. (2009) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.02.008 · Cited by 72
Micro‐wear in perspective: A sympathetic response to Lawrence H. Keeley
Odell, G. H. (1975) · World Archaeology · doi:10.1080/00438243.1975.9979635 · Cited by 68
Fire production in the deep past? The expedient strike-a-light model
Sorensen, A. C., Roebroeks, W., & van Gijn, A. (2013) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2013.11.032 · Cited by 63
The Lower Paleolithic: Current Evidence and Interpretations
Jelinek, A. J. (1977) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev.an.06.100177.000303 · Cited by 60
The Buffalo Pound in North-Western Plains Prehistory: Site 48 CA 302, Wyoming
Frison, G. C. (1971) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/278024 · Cited by 54
Self-citationCollins, S. (2008) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2008.01.017 · Cited by 54
Ellis, C. J. (2004) · Canadian Journal of Archaeology · Cited by 54
Is Curation a Useful Heuristic?
Nash, S. E. (1996) · Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology/Interdisciplinary contributions to archaeology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-0173-6_4 · Cited by 52
Stone technology at the Middle Pleistocene site of Mata Menge, Flores, Indonesia
Brumm, A., Moore, M. W., van den Bergh, G. D., Kurniawan, I., Morwood, M. J., & Aziz, F. (2009) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2009.09.012 · Cited by 49
Hoffecker, J. F., Baryshnikov, G. F., & Potapova, O. (1991) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/0305-4403(91)90043-o · Cited by 49
The beginnings and diversity of Levallois methods in the early Middle Palaeolithic of Central Europe
Wiśniewski, A. (2013) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2013.10.027 · Cited by 47
Points on Points: A Reply to Flenniken and Raymond
Thomas, D. H. (1986) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/281758 · Cited by 47
Dogandžić, T., Braun, D. R., & McPherron, S. P. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0133984 · Cited by 46
McAnany, P. A. (1989) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/281710 · Cited by 46
What is in a name?: Characterising the 'Post-Howieson's Poort' at Sibudu
Conard, N. J., Porraz, G., & Wadley, L. (2012) · Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida) · Cited by 45
Benito‐Calvo, A., Arroyo, A., Sánchez‐Romero, L., Pante, M. C., & de la Torre, I. (2017) · Archaeometry · doi:10.1111/arcm.12325 · Cited by 43
The Effects of Lithic Procurement Strategies on Tool Curation and Recycling
McAnany, P. A. (1988) · Lithic Technology · doi:10.1080/01977261.1988.11754520 · Cited by 24
Toolkit Composition and Assemblage Variability: The Implications of Nogahabara I, Northern Alaska
Odess, D., & Rasic, J. T. (2007) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/25470441 · Cited by 39
The Refitting of Chipped-Stone Artifacts as an Analytical and Interpretive Tool
Hofman, J. L. (1981) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/202754 · Cited by 39
Scraper reduction and “imposed form” at the Lower Palaeolithic site of High Lodge, England
Brumm, A., & McLaren, A. (2010) · Journal of Human Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2010.09.005 · Cited by 38
The application and misapplication of mass analysis in lithic debitage studies
Andrefsky, W. (2006) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/j.jas.2006.05.012 · Cited by 38
Functional Interpretations from Microscopic Analysis
Nance, J. D. (1971) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/277721 · Cited by 37
Taphonomy and Zooarchaeology of a Mousterian Faunal Assemblage from La Quina, Charente, France
Chase, P. G., Armand, D., Debénath, A., Dibble, H. L., & Jelinek, A. J. (1994) · Journal of Field Archaeology · doi:10.1179/009346994791547571 · Cited by 36
Lithic production strategies in the Middle Paleolithic of the southern Balkans
Dogandžić, T., & Đuričić, L. (2017) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2017.03.011 · Cited by 35
Middle Paleolithic sidescrapers were resharped or recycled? A view from Nesher Ramla, Israel
Zaidner, Y., & Grosman, L. (2015) · Quaternary International · doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2014.11.037 · Cited by 34
Evidence for Late Paleoindian Ritual from the Caradoc Site (AfHj-104), Southwestern Ontario, Canada
Deller, D. B., & Ellis, C. J. (2001) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/2694608 · Cited by 33
Stone Tools, Style, and Social Identity: an Evolutionary Perspective on the Archaeological Record
Barton, C. M. (1997) · Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association · doi:10.1525/ap3a.1997.7.1.141 · Cited by 33
The Technological Organization Of Paleo-Indian Small-Group Bison Hunting on the Llano Estacado
Bamforth, D. B. (1985) · Plains Anthropologist · doi:10.1080/2052546.1985.11909252 · Cited by 33
AGENTS OF CHANGE: MODELING BIOCULTURAL EVOLUTION IN UPPER PLEISTOCENE WESTERN EURASIA
Barton, C. M., & Riel-Salvatore, J. G. (2011) · Advances in Complex Systems · doi:10.1142/s0219525911003359 · Cited by 32
Functional Analysis of Stone Tools: A Cautionary Note on the Role of Animal Fats
Brose, D. S. (1975) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279272 · Cited by 32
Kornfeld, M., & Huckell, B. B. (2016) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607324539 · Cited by 31
A Functional Analysis of “Clear Fork” Artifacts From the Rio Grande Plain, Texas
Hester, T. R., Gilbow, D. W., & Albee, A. D. (1973) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279314 · Cited by 31
Plains Paleoindian Projectile Point Penetration Potential
Eren, M. I., Bebber, M. R., Knell, E. J., STORY, B. A., & Buchanan, B. (2022) · Journal of Anthropological Research · doi:10.1086/717831 · Cited by 30
Aleo, A., Duches, R., Falcucci, A., Rots, V., & Peresani, M. (2021) · Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences · doi:10.1007/s12520-021-01367-4 · Cited by 28
A Circum-Pacific Perspective on the Origin of Stemmed Points in North America
Pratt, J. E., Goebel, T., Graf, K. E., & Izuho, M. (2019) · PaleoAmerica · doi:10.1080/20555563.2019.1695500 · Cited by 28
Edge Angle As A Functional Indicator: A Test
Siegel, P. E. (1985) · Lithic Technology · doi:10.1080/01977261.1985.11754508 · Cited by 28
Stone-Tool Demography: Reduction Distributions in North American Paleoindian Tools
Shott, M. (2010) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-6861-6_12 · Cited by 26
UNRETOUCHED BLADES IN THE LATE MESOLITHIC OF SOUTH SCANDINAVIA. A FUNCTIONAL STUDY
Jensen, H. J. (1986) · Oxford Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0092.1986.tb00128.x · Cited by 26
Starting From Scratch: The History Of Edge-Wear Research From 1838 To 1978
Olausson, D. S. (1980) · Lithic Technology · doi:10.1080/01977261.1980.11754470 · Cited by 24
Stone Tools and Paleolithic Settlement in the Iberian Peninsula
Barton, C. M. (1990) · Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society · doi:10.1017/s0079497x00005004 · Cited by 23
From Artifacts to Cultures: Technology, Society, and Knowledge in the Upper Paleolithic
Barton, C. M., & Clark, G. A. (2021) · Journal of Paleolithic Archaeology · doi:10.1007/s41982-021-00091-8 · Cited by 23
The final MSA of eastern South Africa: a comparative study between Umbeli Belli and Sibhudu
Bader, G. D., Sommer, C., Conard, N. J., & Wadley, L. (2022) · Azania Archaeological Research in Africa · doi:10.1080/0067270x.2022.2078553 · Cited by 23
Lithic Analysis and Cultural Inference: A Paleo-Indian Case. By Edwin N. Wilmsen.
Frison, G. C. (1971) · American Journal of Archaeology · doi:10.2307/504061 · Cited by 23
Self-citationBader, G. D., Cable, C., Lentfer, C., & Conard, N. J. (2016) · Journal of Archaeological Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2016.08.038 · Cited by 22
Moore, M. W. (2000) · Archaeology in Oceania/Archæology & physical anthropology in Oceania · doi:10.1002/j.1834-4453.2000.tb00456.x · Cited by 22
Neandertal Lithic Industries at La Quina
Jelinek, A. J. (2013) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 22
Cross Ranch: A Study of Variability in a Stable Cultural Tradition
Calabrese, F. A. (1972) · Plains Anthropologist · doi:10.1080/2052546.1972.11908628 · Cited by 21
Younger Dryas Archaeology and Human Experience at the Paisley Caves in the Northern Great Basin
Jenkins, D. L., Davis, L. G., Stafford, T. W., Connolly, T. J., Jones, G. T., Rondeau, M. F., Cummings, L. S., Hockett, B., McDonough, K. N., O’Grady, P., et al. (2016) · University Press of Colorado eBooks · doi:10.5876/9781607324539.c006 · Cited by 20
Multivariate Statistical Analysis of a Regional Subsistence-Settlement Model for Owens Valley
Bettinger, R. L. (1979) · American Antiquity · doi:10.2307/279545 · Cited by 20
An evaluation of Keeley's microwear approach
Holley, G. A., & Bene, T. A. D. (1981) · Journal of Archaeological Science · doi:10.1016/0305-4403(81)90033-9 · Cited by 20
McNiven, I. J. (2000) · Archaeology in Oceania/Archæology & physical anthropology in Oceania · doi:10.1002/j.1834-4453.2000.tb00450.x · Cited by 17
Greiser, S. T. (1977) · Plains Anthropologist · doi:10.1080/2052546.1977.11908838 · Cited by 17
Metadata
- Authors
- Frison, G. C.
- Affiliations
- University of Wyoming (US)
- Corresponding author
- Frison, George C.
- Venue
- American Antiquity
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1968-04
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 149-155
- ISSN
- 0002-7316 (ISSN-L)
- 2325-5064
- OpenAlex
- W2040220597
- Semantic Scholar
- e567a0bdba7004a12437a8c9bdc6846b9bb50490
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 24.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- American Antiquity (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation
- University of Michigan
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Archaeological and Geological Studies
- Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
- Keywords
- chipped stone tools, stone flakes, tool sharpening, butchery, Late Prehistory, lithic technology, tool use
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
