English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The passing of Thomas H. Loy in late 2005 presents an opportunity to reflect on the field of archaeological stone-tool microscopic residue analysis, of which Loy was a pioneer. This paper discusses one important and neglected aspect of residue studies from an historical perspective: reliance by residue analysts on small sample sizes. A review of stone-tool microscopic residue studies published over the first 30 years of the discipline (1976-2006) demonstrates that half of these examined 25 or fewer artefacts, with sample sizes of three or fewer artefacts being most common. In addition, sample sizes are shown to be decreasing in recent years. These findings have implications for the applicability of the novel data provided by residues to broader archaeological debates, and are discussed in relation to the specialisation of archaeological microscopic residue analyses. The review provides a caution against over-interpretation and emphasises the need for a more explicit link between sample sizes and research questions, while recognising the validity and usefulness of appropriately theorised studies of small numbers of artefacts.

Mountains and molehills: sample size in archaeological microscopic stone-tool residue analysis