Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Field Archaeology
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Diana Alexander
Simon Fraser University
Monetary and time constraints have necessitated the continued use of traditional surveying techniques, despite the tendency of non-probabilistic surveys
to yield unrepresentative and biased samples. Unfortunately the lack of information on the extent and nature of this sample bias has made it almost impossible to evaluate the results of such surveys. By examining the results of a
traditional and a probabilistic survey of the same area of NE British ColumbiaS this report quantitatively measures the bias inherent in a traditional, boreal forest survey.
Introduction
comparing the results of a traditional survey with a subThe traditional archaeological approach to site survey surface, probabilistic survey of the same region? this parelies heavily on intuitive concepts to determine potentialper quantitatively measures the degree and form of bias
site locations. 1 Although these concepts have often been that can result from the use of a traditional sampling
gained from intimate familiarity with the primary data, methodology.
The disadvantages of a traditional approach to site surthis ''gut-level" of analysis introduces the possibility
vey are well recognized. The major shortcoming of this
that the resulting conclusions reflect preconceived perapproach is that it is non-probabilistic and incapable of
sonal biases. To overcome this methodological problem
yielding a valid estimate of the risks of error.3 Any atmany archaeologists have resorted to the use of probatempt to determine biases in the procedure is further
bilistic sampling designs.2 Used correctly, this approach
thwarted by the general lack of explicit descriptions of
can provide an unbiased record of site locations. By
the sampling methodology used in traditional surveys.
As a consequence it is almost impossible quantitatively
1. See, e.g.? Gordon R. Willey, Prehistoric Settlement Patterns in
or qualitatively to evaluate or replicate these studies. The
the New World (Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Reonly means of accurately determining the validity of trasearch: New York 1956); Stuart Struever, "Woodland Subsistence
ditional survey results is by comparing these results with
Settlement Systems in the Lower Illinois Valley,'' in Sally R. Binford
those of a probabilistic survey of the same region.
and Lewis R. Binford, eds., New Perspectives in Archeology (Aldine
Most regional studies, both traditional and probabilisPublishing Company: Chicago 1968) 285-312.
tic,
have been undertaken in areas such as the American
2. See, e.g., David H. Thomas, "Regional Sampling in Archaeology.
Southwest where there is ideal topography and only sparse
A Pilot Great Basin Research Design," University of California Arground cover. It is only in the last few years that probchaeological Survey, Annual Report 1 1 (Los Angeles 1969) 87-100;
Michael B. Schiffer and John H. House, ''The Cache River Archaeabilistic surveys have been attempted in areas with the
ological Project,'' Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Publication in
heavy ground cover typical of the boreal forest found in
Archaeology 8 (1975); Charles A. Reher, Settlement and Subsistence
the
study area.4 The surveying problems encountered in
Along the Lower Chaco River: The C.G.P. Survey (University of New
these forested areas are often very different from those
Mexico Press: Albuquerque 1977); Bruce F. Ball, "Heritage Resources of the Northeast Coal Study Area," Report to the Archaeology
found in more arid regions. Consequently, the results of
Division, Heritage Conservation Branch, Government of British Columbia (1978); Jack D. Nance, "Non-site Sampling in the Lower
Cumberland River Valley, Kentucky," MCJA 5 (1980) 169-191; Brian 3. Hubert M. Blalock Jr. Social Statistics (McGraw-Hill Book Company: New York 1972) 527.
E. Spurling, "The Site C Heritage Resource Inventory and Assessment: Impacts and Mitigation,' Report to British Columbia Hydro
4. See, for example, W. A. Lovis, i'Quartersections and Forests: An
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
nlques.
Area
Strata
South
(sq.
Upper
km.)
32.50
Intermediate
14.25
Methodology
Lower
18.00
Islands
9.50
(islands in river)
North
Lower
21.50
Upper
29.25
river where there was less ground cover and easy access.
in this target area and the matrix was screened and ex-
41 (1976) 364-372; Nance, op. cit. (in note 2); idem, "Regional
44 (1979) 172-176.
Ibid.
18.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
sampling techniques in terms of the number of sites located. The figures in this table are based on information
provided by Spurlingl2 and by site forms. The section
east Ohio," in Charles C. Cleland, ed., Cultural Change and Continuity (Academic Press, Inc.: New York 1976) 3-18.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
contour lines.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
I
Journal of Field Archaeology/Vol. 10, 1983 181
the G-test (the likelihood ratio version of chi-square).l7
l
l l
oj
ln
i)
Evergreen
Deciduous
e = expected frequency
k = number of cells
Variable
Range
Horizontal Vertical
(m
(ft.)
each site was within the ranges outlined for the remain-
Peace
River
100
100
Bog
100
200
17. l;t. Sokal and F. l;tohlf, Biometrv (W. H. Freeman: San Francisco
Number
oi
20
113
33
of
Ibid.
550.
19.
Ibid.
560.
Sites
ei
4.6
128.4
(df = degrees of freedom; p = probability that archaeological sites are associated with secondary river
drainages. )
ment, Environmental and Socioeconomic Assessment, Wildlife Subl;teport," Report to British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority
(1977).
22. Thurber Consultants Ltd ., " Development Proposals and l;tesource Inventories, Sites C and E Hydroelectric Development Proposals, Lower Peace l;tiver Environmental Study, Vol. I," l;teport to
British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority (1976); idem, ''Peace
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ence of roads and terrace edges, these proportions provide a conservative estimate.
Cultural
Continuing with the earlier example, the expected frequency of sites near a secondary river drainage was cal-
Material
82
86
Cultural
Material
88
84
+
-
1
7
12
16
20
(TABLE 4) and the data were tested, with the G-test, for
statistical independence between each variable and the
occurrence of cultural material. Finally the exact prob-
sampling designs.
23. Thomas, op. cit. (in note 2) 87-100; Richard G Matson and
in the quadrat were outside the 100 m. range and contained artifacts (TABLE 5).
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
In the case of 2 x 2 tables where the expected frequencies are small, it is possible to use an exact probability test known as Fisher's Exact Test.26 If we label
the cells and margins of a 2 x 2 table as follows,
Results
Tables 6 and 7 illustrate the final results of this comparative analysis. The basis statistical data are presented
in Table 6 while Table 7 provides a verbal interpretation
of these statistics. In the latter, .05 was used as the level
of statistical significance for the traditional survey data.
Because the Fisher's Exact Test, as used in this study,
was a one-tailed test and the interest was in a two-tailed
test similar to the G-test, the significance level was halved
to .025 for the probabilistic survey data. 28
Clearly, the traditional survey produced different results. For example, the data from the probabilistic survey
suggest that site locations are independent of bogs, secondary river drainages and remnant river confluences,
A+B
C+D
A+C B+D N
N! a! b! c! d!
population size.
The other differences ensue from prejudicial assumptions made by the surveyors. Since the entire survey area
could not be observed, they concentrated their surveying
efforts in locations considered to be the most productive.
In this case the "good spots" were located away from
bogs and near remnant river confluences and secondary
drainages. This configuration reflects lack of concern for
past hunting-and-gathering practices which necessitated
following game into areas away from the rivers and into
marshland.
26.
Ibid.
287.
27. Sokal and Rolhf, op. cit. (in note 17) Section 17.1; R. A. Fisher,
Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 12th rev. ed. (Oliver and
Boyd: Edinburgh 1954) Section 21.1.
28. Sokal and Rohlf, op. cit. (in note 17) 593-598.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Variable
Range*
Cultivated/Natural
Pasture/Broken
Prairie/Forest
100
Bog
Road
(H)
200
100
146.0884
Road
Terr.
Edge
(V)
200
(V)
100
Peace
R.
100
Peace
R.
Sec.
Drain.
Sec.
Drain.
(H)
200
100
Pres.
Conf.
Pres.
Conf.
(V)
(H)
+200
500
+
Remn.
Confl.
Remn.
Confl.
22.1505
(H)
200
4.9946
2.6368
(V)
500
+200
.9136
(H)
.271
5.7657
.828
.864
.864
<.001
<.001
97.3438
<.001
41.3875
.004
41.3875
.004
<.001
11.1080
.796
.026
12.4348
.712
.108
16.1257
.111
16.1257
.111
.368
5.0491
(V)
.763
79.5340
<.001
30.0086
(V)
.341
4.9319
11.5420
<.001
1.2510
13.5684
79.5340
<.001
<.001
11.5420
<.001
61.8826
2E1nP
82.4227
.006
<.001
16.9732
(H)
<.001
<.001
13.9372
20.0663
<.001
7.5650
13.9372
(H)
<.001
227.2463
Deciduous/Evergreen
Bog
38.1873
.025
5.0491
.025
4.8498
.771
4.1428
.838
(p = probability that an association between archaeological sites and any variable occurred by chance; -2E1np = combined
probability for all quadrats)
traditional survey does not exist and the data are there-
fore biased.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
TRADITIONAL SURVEY
an indirect association between sites and roads and powerlines caused by similarities in prehistoric and extant
settlement patterns.
In summary, the traditional survey is 1) biased in fa-
Absence of bog
PROBABILISTIC SURVEY
Cultural material is associated with:
Presence of cultivated land and natural cover
Presence of roads and powerlines
sideration of vertical distance had little effect on the outcome. Moreover, individual testing of the strata used in
Secondary drainages
30. Ibid.
31. Brose, op. cit. (in note 13) 3-18.
29. Spurling, op. cit. (in note 2) 19, Table 58, Sheets 1-3.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Conclusions
sample and is consequently a biased procedure. The implications are obvious. The nonrepresentative sample
legitimately used in the analysis of areal trends in archaeology. Perhaps the greatest danger is that the idio-
Ibid.
48.
37.
Ibid.
This content downloaded from 148.223.96.146 on Thu, 01 Dec 2016 04:06:18 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms