DETERMINING HOMINID HANDEDNESS IN LITHIC DEBITAGE: A REVIEW OF CURRENT METHODOLOGIES
Lana Ruck, Douglas C. Broadfield, Clifford T. Brown
Abstract
Lana Ruck, Douglas C. Broadfield, Clifford T. Brown
Abstract
Handedness is inextricably linked to brain lateralization and language in humans, and identifying handedness in the paleo-archaeological record is important for understanding hominid cognitive evolution. This study reports on experiments for identifying knapper handedness in lithic debitage using three previously established methods: , and . A blind study was conducted on lithic debitage (n = 631) from Acheulean handaxes (n = 10) created by right- and left-handed subjects. Blinded handedness predictions for flakes were compared to their true handedness in order to assess each method's reliability. In order to test replicability, multiple observers classified a sample of flakes and inter-observer agreement was assessed. None of the methods were better than chance in predictive accuracy, and there were significant issues with inter-observer agreement. This study suggests that identifying knapper handedness in lithic debitage is extremely difficult, but also that some existing methodological issues may have simple solutions; suggestions for future research on this topic are provided.
OpenAlex reports 11 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Handedness is inextricably linked to brain lateralization and language in humans, and identifying handedness in the paleo-archaeological record is important for understanding hominid cognitive evolution. This study reports on experiments for identifying knapper handedness in lithic debitage using three previously established methods: , and . A blind study was conducted on lithic debitage (n = 631) from Acheulean handaxes (n = 10) created by right- and left-handed subjects. Blinded handedness predictions for flakes were compared to their true handedness in order to assess each method's reliability. In order to test replicability, multiple observers classified a sample of flakes and inter-observer agreement was assessed. None of the methods were better than chance in predictive accuracy, and there were significant issues with inter-observer agreement. This study suggests that identifying knapper handedness in lithic debitage is extremely difficult, but also that some existing methodological issues may have simple solutions; suggestions for future research on this topic are provided.
Key concepts: Debitage, Acheulean, Experimental archaeology, Psychology, Archaeology, History, Pleistocene