1/7
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced | Call with Kai |
|---|
No analytics yet
Send a link to your students to track their progress
Spradley & Weisensee (2013) - Justification for US ancestry estimation
There is a link between the categories white and black and population structure
Assortative mating/population history resulted in biological clustering
Spradley & Weisensee (2013) core argument
Social and historical forces (not innate biology) produced measurable population clustering
Forensic methods can detect these
Secular changes
Short-term generational or microevolutionary changes
Complicate using older reference populations for modern individuals
Use of ancestry within the biological profile
Helps determine which reference population ti use to estimate age, sex and statue
Cunha & Ubelaker (2019) + Spradley & Weisenee (2013) show different groups express sexual dimorphism differently
Morphoscopic/Non-metric traits
Observable skeletal features used for ancestry estimation
Criticism of non-metric traits
Bethard & DiGangi (2020)
We dont know why these traits exist and they reinforce outdated concepts of biological race
Ousley/Hefner (2005/2006)
Developed a method for analysing non-metric traits that considered trait distribution rather than forcing them into fixed categories
Cunha & Ubelaker (2019) recommendation
A combination of metric (measurements) and non-metric (morphoscopic) approaches
Neither alone is sufficient