Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-wxvwp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T19:38:41.895Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Size Effect: An Explanation of Variability in Surface Artifact Assemblage Content

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Charles M. Baker
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The reuse of certain categories of artifacts combined with natural site formation processes, such as sedimentation and erosion, is suggested to result in the disproportionate occurrence of “large” artifacts on the surface of sites. This phenomenon, known as the size effect, is investigated with artifact assemblage data from several stratified Eastern North American sites.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , April 1978, pp. 288 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1978

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baker, Charles M. and Schiffer, Michael B. 1975 Archeological evidence for the size effect. In Arkansas Eastman Archeological Project, by Charles M.Baker. Arkansas Archeological Survey, Research Report 6:117–22.Google Scholar
Binford, Lewis R., Binford, Sally R., Whallon, Robert, and Hardin, M. A. 1970 Archaeology at Hatchery West. Society for American Archaeology, Memoirs 24.Google Scholar
Chomko, Stephen A. 1974 A survey technique for delimiting activity areas within a site. The Missouri Archaeological Society,Newsletter 278:1–5.Google Scholar
Coe, JoffreL. 1964 The Formative cultures of the Carolina Piedmont. American Philosophical Society, Transactions 54,Pt. 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houart, Gail L. 1971 Koster: a stratified Archaic site in the Illinois Valley. Illinois State Museum, Reports of Investigations 22.Google Scholar
House, John H. and Schiffer, Michael B. 1975 Significance of the archeological resources of the Cache River Basin. In The Cache River ArcheologicalProject, assembled by Michael B. Schiffer and John H. House. Arkansas Archeological Survey, ResearchSeries 8:163–86.Google Scholar
Lavine-Lischka, Leslie 1976 The use of lithic technology and the inference of cultural behavior patterns. Newsletter of LithicTechnology 5:11–17.Google Scholar
Lewis, Thomas M.N. and Lewis, Madeline Kneberg 1961 Eva: an Archaic site. The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.Google Scholar
Redman, Charles L. and Watson, Patty Jo 1970 Systematic, intensive surface collection. American Antiquity 35:279–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rick, John W. 1976 Downslope movement and archaeological intrasite spatial analysis. American Antiquity 41:133–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roper, Donna C. 1976 Lateral displacement of artifacts due to plowing. American Antiquity 41:372–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffer, Michael B. 1972 Archaeological context and systemic context. American Antiquity 37:156–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffer, Michael B. 1976 Behavioral archeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Winters, Howard D. 1969 The Riverton Culture. Illinois State Museum, Reports of Investigations 13.Google Scholar
Wood, W. Raymond and Johnson, Donald L. n.d. A survey of disturbance processes in archaeological site formation. In Advances in archaeological methodand theory, Vol. 1, edited by Schiffer, Michael B.. Academic Press, New York (in press, m.s. 1977).Page 156Google Scholar