Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:49:59.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mobilization as Mediation

Implementing a Tablet-Based Recording System for Ceramic Classification

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2018

Parker VanValkenburgh ,
Luiza O. G. Silva ,
Chiara Repetti-Ludlow ,
Jake Gardner ,
Jackson Crook  and
Brian Ballsun-Stanton
Parker VanValkenburgh*
Affiliation:
128 Hope Street, Providence, RI 02906, USA
Luiza O. G. Silva
Affiliation:
128 Hope Street, Providence, RI 02906, USA
Chiara Repetti-Ludlow
Affiliation:
128 Hope Street, Providence, RI 02906, USA
Jake Gardner
Affiliation:
128 Hope Street, Providence, RI 02906, USA
Jackson Crook
Affiliation:
128 Hope Street, Providence, RI 02906, USA
Brian Ballsun-Stanton
Affiliation:
16 University Avenue, Department of Ancient History, Macquarie University, Sydney 2109 New South Wales, Australia
*
(parker_vanvalkenburgh@brown.edu, corresponding author)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this essay, we examine the potentials and challenges of mobile computing for a core activity of archaeological laboratory research—the typological analysis of ceramics. We discuss the collaborative development, implementation, and evaluation of the PAZC Ceramics module in the FAIMS Mobile platform. Our deployment of the module yielded significant improvements in the efficiency of data collection, as well as reduced numbers of missing fields and higher user satisfaction scores. However, it did not improve data consistency between users and yielded a classificatory system that was somewhat more challenging to update than our previous mode of operation. These results underscore some of the trade-offs that may be entailed in employing mobile technologies for archaeological applications and highlight the ways in which specific media configurations impact the production of archaeological knowledge.

En este artículo, examinamos las posibilidades y desafíos que presenta la computación móvil para una actividad fundamental de la investigación arqueológica —el análisis tipológico de la cerámica. Discutimos el desarrollo colaborativo, la implementación y la evaluación de PAZC Ceramics, un módulo de la plataforma de Sistemas de Manejo de Información Adquirida en Campo (FAIMS, por sus siglas en inglés). Nuestra implementación del módulo produjo mejoras significativas en la eficiencia de la recolección de datos, así como un número reducido de campos perdidos y mayores puntuaciones de satisfacción de usuario. Sin embargo, no mejoró la coherencia de los datos entre usuarios y produjo un sistema clasificatorio un poco más difícil de actualizar respecto al modo de operación anterior. Estos resultados ponen de relieve algunos de los retos que presenta el empleo de tecnologías móviles para aplicaciones arqueológicas y destacan las maneras en que las configuraciones específicas del sistema de registro pueden afectar la producción del conocimiento arqueológico.

Type
Articles
Information
Advances in Archaeological Practice , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , November 2018 , pp. 342 - 356
Copyright
Copyright 2018 © Society for American Archaeology 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES CITED

Austin, Anne 2014 Mobilizing Archaeologists: Increasing the Quantity and Quality of Data Collected in the Field with Mobile Technology. Advances in Archaeological Practice 2:13–23.Google Scholar
Averett, Erin Walcek, Counts, Derek, and Gordon, Jody (editors) 2016 Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Ballsun-Stanton, Brian, Ross, Shawn A., Sobotkova, Adela, and Crook, Penny 2018 FAIMS Mobile: Flexible, Open-Source Software for Field Research. SoftwareX 7:47–52.Google Scholar
Berggren, Aasa, Dell'Unto, Nicolo, Forte, Maurizio, Haddow, Scott, Hodder, Ian, Issavi, Justine, Lercari, Nicola, Mazzucato, Camilla, Mickel, Allison, and Taylor, James S. 2015 Revisiting Reflexive Archaeology at Çatalhöyük: Integrating Digital and 3D Technologies at the Trowel's Edge. Antiquity 89 (344):433–448.Google Scholar
Bria, Rebecca, and DeTore, Kathryn E. 2016 Enhancing Archaeological Data Collection and Student Learning with a Mobile Relational Database. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 143–182. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Caraher, William 2013 Slow Archaeology. North Dakota Quarterly 80 (2):43–52.Google Scholar
Caraher, William 2016 Slow Archaeology: Technology, Efficiency, and Archaeological Work. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 421–442. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Cascalheira, João, Bicho, Nuno, and Gonçalves, Célia 2017 A Google-Based Freeware Solution for Archaeological Field Survey and Onsite Artifact Analysis. Advances in Archaeological Practice 5:328–339.Google Scholar
Ceruzzi, Paul E. 2012 Computing: A Concise History. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Dufton, J. Andrew 2016 CSS for Success? Some Thoughts on Adapting the Browser-Based Archaeological Recording Kit (ARK) for Mobile Recording. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 373–398. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Ellis, Steven J. R. 2016 Are We Ready for New (Digital) Ways to Record Archaeological Fieldwork? A Case Study from Pompeii. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 51–76. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Ellis, Steven, and Wallrodt, John 2012 Pompeii and the iPad: An Update. Paper presented at the. 2012. Computer Applications in Archaeology Conference, March 26–29, Southampton, UK.Google Scholar
Fee, Samuel B., Pettegrew, David K., and Caraher, William R. 2013 Taking Mobile Computing to the Field. Near Eastern Archaeology 76 (1):50–55.Google Scholar
Ford, James A. 1954 Comment on A. C. Spaulding, “Statistical Techniques for the Discovery of Artifact Types.” American Antiquity 19:390–391.Google Scholar
Ford, James A., and Steward, Julian H. 1954 On the Concept of Types. American Anthropologist 56 (1):42–57.Google Scholar
Gifford, James C. 1960 The Type-Variety Method of Ceramic Classification as an Indicator of Cultural Phenomena. American Antiquity 25:341–347.Google Scholar
Gordon, Jody Michael, Averett, Erin Walcek, and Counts, Derek B. 2016 Mobile Computing in Archaeology: Exploring and Interpreting Current Practices. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 1–32. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Griffin, James B. 1949 Prehistoric Pottery of the Eastern United States. Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Hegmon, Michelle 1992 Archaeological Research on Style. Annual Review of Anthropology 21 (1):517–536.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin 2010 [1953] Being and Time. Translated by Stambaugh, Joan. State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
Hodder, Ian 1982 Symbols in Action: Ethnoarchaeological Studies of Material Culture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Huggett, Jeremy 2004 Archaeology and the New Technological Fetishism. Archeologia e calcolatori 15:81–92.Google Scholar
Huggett, Jeremy 2015a Challenging Digital Archaeology. Open Archaeology 1 (1).Google Scholar
Huggett, Jeremy 2015b A Manifesto for an Introspective Digital Archaeology. Open Archaeology 1 (1).Google Scholar
Jackson, Sarah E., Motz, Christopher F., and Brown, Linda A. 2016 Pushing the Paperless Envelope: Digital Recording and Innovative Ways of Seeing at a Classic Maya Site. Advances in Archaeological Practice 4:176–191.Google Scholar
Kansa, Eric C., Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B. 2016 Click Here to Save the Past. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, pp. 443–474. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Kersel, Morag M. 2016 Response: Living a Semi-Digital Kinda Life. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 475–492. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno, and Woolgar, Steve 1979 Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.Google Scholar
Leighton, Mary 2015 Excavation Methodologies and Labour as Epistemic Concerns in the Practice of Archaeology: Comparing Examples from British and Andean Archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 22 (1):65–88.Google Scholar
Leighton, Mary 2016 Indigenous Archaeological Field Technicians at Tiwanaku, Bolivia: A Hybrid Form of Scientific Labor. American Anthropologist 118 (4):742–754.Google Scholar
Lyman, R. Lee, O'Brien, Michael J., and Dunnell, Robert C. 1997 The Rise and Fall of Culture History. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
McLuhan, Marshall 1965 Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
McPherron, Shannon P., and Dibble, Harold Lewis 2002 Using Computers in Archaeology: A Practical Guide. McGraw-Hill/Mayfield, Boston.Google Scholar
Morgan, Colleen, and Eve, Stuart 2012 DIY and Digital Archaeology: What Are You Doing to Participate? World Archaeology 44 (4):521–537.Google Scholar
Motz, Christopher F. 2016 Sangro Valley and the Five (Paperless) Seasons: Lessons on Building Effective Digital Recording Workflows for Archaeological Fieldwork. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 77–110. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Nakassis, Dmitri 2015 Thinking Digital Archaeology. Aegean Prehistory (blog). https://englianos.wordpress.com/2015/08/10/thinking-digital-archaeology/.Google Scholar
Norman, Don 2013 The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Opitz, Rachel 2015 Teaching Practice while Developing Practice: Mobile Computing at the Gabii Project Field School. Paper presented at the “Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology” Workshop, February 28, Boston.Google Scholar
Orton, Clive, and Hughes, Mike 2013 Pottery in Archaeology. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Petrie, William Matthew Flinders 1899 Sequences in Prehistoric Remains. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 29 (3/4):295–301.Google Scholar
Poehler, Eric E. 2016 Digital Pompeii: Dissolving the Fieldwork-Library Research Divide. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 201–220. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Prins, Adam B., Adams, Matthew J., Homsher, Robert S., and Ashley, Michael 2014 Digital Archaeological Fieldwork and the Jezreel Valley Regional Project, Israel. Near Eastern Archaeology 77 (3):192–197.Google Scholar
Rabinowitz, Adam 2016 Response: Mobilizing (Ourselves) for a Critical Digital Archaeology. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 493–520. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Rice, Prudence M. 1976 Rethinking the Ware Concept. American Antiquity 41:538–543.Google Scholar
Rice, Prudence M. 2015 Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook. 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Roosevelt, Christopher H., Cobb, Peter, Moss, Emanuel, Olson, Brandon R., and Ünlüsoy, Sinan 2015 Excavation Is Destruction Digitization: Advances in Archaeological Practice. Journal of Field Archaeology 40 (3):325–346.Google Scholar
Ross, Shawn, Ballsun-Stanton, Brian, Sobotkova, Adela, and Crook, Penny 2015 Building the Bazaar: Enhancing Archaeological Field Recording through an Open Source Approach. In Open Source Archaeology: Ethics and Practice, edited by Wilson, Andrew T. and Edwards, Ben, pp. 111–129. De Gruyter Open, Warsaw.Google Scholar
Ross, Shawn, Sobotkova, Adela, Ballsun-Stanton, Brian, and Crook, Penny 2013 Creating Research Tools for Archaeologists: The Federated Archaeological Information Management Systems Project. Australian Archaeology 77 (1):107–119.Google Scholar
Sayre, Matthew 2016 Digital Archaeology in the Rural Andes: Problems and Prospects. In 0Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 183–200. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Serrano Araque, M., and Martínez Carillo, A. L. 2014 El Sistema TooWaste, ver. 0: Tecnologías para la traslación arqueológica de las historias en la tierra. Siete Esquinas 6:15–16.Google Scholar
Shanks, Michael, and Witmore, Christopher 2012 Archaeology 2.0? Review of Archaeology 2.0: New Approaches to Communication and Collaboration. Internet Archaeology 32. Electronic document, http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue32/shanks-witmore.html.Google Scholar
Sinopoli, Carla M. 1991 Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics. Springer Science and Business Media, New York.Google Scholar
Sobotkova, Adela 2013 The Use of Information Technology in Australian Archaeology: The FAIMS Digital Data Survey Report. Electronic document, https://www.fedarch.org/documents/DigitalDataSurveyReport.pdf.Google Scholar
Sobotkova, Adela, Ross, Shawn A, Ballsun-Stanton, Brian, Fairbairn, Andrew, Thompson, Jessica, and VanValkenburgh, Parker 2016 Measure Twice, Cut Once: Cooperative Deployment of a Generalized, Archaeology-Specific Field Data Collection System. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and, pp. 337–372. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1953 Statistical Techniques for the Discovery of Artifact Types. American Antiquity 18:305–313.Google Scholar
Spaulding, Albert C. 1954 Reply to Ford. American Antiquity 19:391–393.Google Scholar
Spigelman, Matthew, Roberts, Ted, and Fehrenbach, Shawn 2016 The Development of the PaleoWay Digital Workflows in the Context of Archaeological Consulting. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 399–420. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Strong, William Duncan, and Evans, Clifford 1952 Cultural Stratigraphy in the Virú Valley, Northern Peru: The Formative and Florescent Epochs. Columbia Studies in Archeology and Ethnology 4. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Thomsen, Christian J. 1848 A Guide to Northern Archaeology. Edited by Early of Ellsemere. James Bain, Haymarket, London.Google Scholar
Torres, Mora, de María, Rocío 2011 Cerámica Colonial en el Valle Bajo y Medio de Zaña: Tecnología, Formas y Comercio. Unpublished Licenciatura thesis, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Lima.Google Scholar
Tschauner, Hartmut 2001 Socioeconomic and Political Organization in the Late Prehispanic Lambayeque Sphere, Northern North Coast of Peru. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Turner, Phil 2005 Affordance as Context. Interacting with Computers 17 (6):787–800.Google Scholar
Velde, Bruce, and Druc, Isabelle C. 1999 Archaeological Ceramic Materials: Origin and Utilization. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Wallrodt, John 2016 Why Paperless: Technology and Changes in Archaeological Practice, 1996–2016. In Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future: The Potential of Digital Archaeology, edited by Averett, Erin Walcek, Gordon, Jody Michael, and Counts, Derek B., pp. 33–50. Digital Press @ the University of North Dakota, Grand Forks.Google Scholar
Wallrodt, John, Dicus, Kevin, Lieberman, Leigh, and Tucker, Gregory 2015 Beyond Tablet Computers as a Tool for Data Collection: Three Seasons of Processing and Curating Digital Data in a Paperless World. In Across Space and Time: Papers from the 41st Conference on Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology, edited by Traviglia, Arianna. Perth, Australia. 25–28 March 2013. Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Wernke, Steven A. 2013 Negotiated Settlements: Andean Communities and Landscapes under Inka and Spanish Colonialism. University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Wernke, Steven A., Adams, Julie A., and Hooten, Eli R. 2014 Capturing Complexity: Toward an Integrated Low-Altitude Photogrammetry and Mobile Geographic Information System Archaeological Registry System. Advances in Archaeological Practice 2:147–163.Google Scholar