Observer Error Associated with Craniometric and Macromorphoscopic Trait Analyses
Primary Investigator (PI) Name
Alice F. Gooding
Abstract
In forensic anthropology, an important component of skeletal analysis is the estimation of ancestral origin. Two methods are most commonly used: observation of gross macromorphoscopic traits and craniometric analysis. While both methods are commonly used in the field, there is little research testing the interobservor and intraobservor error rates associated with each. This study tests the interobservor and intraobserver error associated with one nonmetric method (MaMD) and one metric method (3Skull) using anatomical teaching crania of unknown ancestral origin. Two observers used Hefner’s (2017) macroscopic trait scoring method to collect 17 nonmetric trait data, and collected 28 craniometric measurements using a Microscribe G2x Digitizer from each cranium.
Disciplines
Biological and Physical Anthropology
Observer Error Associated with Craniometric and Macromorphoscopic Trait Analyses
In forensic anthropology, an important component of skeletal analysis is the estimation of ancestral origin. Two methods are most commonly used: observation of gross macromorphoscopic traits and craniometric analysis. While both methods are commonly used in the field, there is little research testing the interobservor and intraobservor error rates associated with each. This study tests the interobservor and intraobserver error associated with one nonmetric method (MaMD) and one metric method (3Skull) using anatomical teaching crania of unknown ancestral origin. Two observers used Hefner’s (2017) macroscopic trait scoring method to collect 17 nonmetric trait data, and collected 28 craniometric measurements using a Microscribe G2x Digitizer from each cranium.