Dear Zooarchs-
I am organizing a session for ICAZ 2006 that is focused on the positive use of negative
results. A full abstract of the session - which has received preliminary approval from the
organizers - follows. I think this is an exciting opportunity to present and use results that might
otherwise be ignored. Presentations on results from a wide range of regions and topics are
welcomed! Please contact me to express your interest and provide a tentative paper topic or title.
Oraganizer: Jill Weber, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, USA
[log in to unmask]
Revision and Rejection: reporting the negative result
The ICAZ 2006 conference has as one of its goals bridging the work of archaeozoologists
across the world. One way of doing this is to focus on methods and theories that can be applied
to multiple regions, time periods, and forms of socio-political organization. Positive results are
frequently reported and add greatly to our shared body of knowledge. However, rigorous testing
of our methods and models requires attempts to gather evidence that significantly alters or
disproves our results. The purpose of this session is to assemble examples of “negative results”
that might not otherwise be publicized, in order to strengthen our collective protocols.
At times, new data or significant theoretical issues may surface that render previously used
procedures, approaches, and models generally untenable or irrelevant by introducing data or
issues that cannot be reconciled with the existing paradigms. In other cases, a method or model
may be inapplicable to a specific assemblage or region due to idiosyncrasies of biology,
morphology, environment or ecology, socio-political organization, or patterns of trash disposal.
Identification of the reasons for which specific failures occur may lead to revision of a particular
theory or method and even a better understanding of why it does work in other cases. This can be
extremely important when considering the relevance of methods to be used in different regions
and time-periods, and between areas with differing cultural and socio-political milieus.
Papers might address negative results in such domains as:
•the usefulness and application of specific methodologies geared toward taxonomic identification
•the effects of environment on isotopic or taphonomic indicators
•the ramifications of results from modern wildlife or animal management studies on
archaeozoological studies that use similar techniques
Papers should identify the specific reasons for the negative results in order to permit refinement
and revision of methods and protocols. A more detailed understanding of these protocols will aid
other researchers in pinpointing which methods may be suitably applied to their own data.
Recognition that not all methods are suitable for all occasions may also help non-experts in
seeking and utilizing the results of archaeozoological procedures.
For instance, this may facilitate understanding by excavators of the types and amounts of data
required for assessing indicators of seasonality, or of culling patterns. Ultimately, this will foster
more reasoned integration of the results of different types of archaeological inquiry.
