Premium
A Test of Sex Estimation in Subadults Using the Elevation of the Auricular Surface from Four Samples of Known Age and Sex
Author(s) -
Blake Kathleen A.S.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of forensic sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.715
H-Index - 96
eISSN - 1556-4029
pISSN - 0022-1198
DOI - 10.1111/1556-4029.14011
Subject(s) - forensic science , elevation (ballistics) , forensic anthropology , biological sex , estimation , sample size determination , demography , sample (material) , statistics , exact test , biology , test (biology) , mathematics , psychology , geography , genetics , ecology , developmental psychology , archaeology , geometry , chemistry , chromatography , sociology , management , economics
Abstract Biological sex is foundational to the work of forensic anthropologists and bioarcheologists. The lack of reliable biological sex estimation methods for subadults has, thus, greatly limited forensic and bioarcheological analyses. Auricular surface elevation showed promise as a subadult sex estimation method in previous studies. This study examined two auricular surface elevation evaluation methods on four subadult samples of known age, sex, and ancestry. Samples were scored as “male,” “female,” or “indeterminate” and results were examined with chi‐square analysis. No consistent sex estimation pattern, accuracy, or predictive value was produced between samples. Only one test was significant using Fisher's exact test analysis ( FET = 7.501, p < 0.022): the composite approach on the Hamann‐Todd sample. While age, sample size, or developmental factors may play a role in these results, clearly sample variation does as well. This study found auricular surface elevation was not a useful subadult sex estimation method.