Search

This paper explores recent research trends in human osteology, based on articles published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology (AJPA) during two 5-year intervals: 1980-1984 and 1996-2000. Topical "visibility" is measured in terms of article counts; "impact" is estimated through citation indices. Our results indicate that human osteologists continue to publish a range of methodological, analytical, and descriptive research papers that address a broad array of subjects. Analytical articles are cited more frequently than descriptive articles and thus have higher impact, reflecting the discipline's continued commitment to problem-oriented research. Differences in publication patterns exist between scholars during early and later stages of their careers. Articles published by students and Ph.D.s within 2 years of their doctoral degree are more frequently descriptive than analytical, when compared to people with longer career histories. Topics such as pathology, forensic anthropology, and biodistance modeling remain highly visible, while articles on the dentition have waned. An increase in functional research directed toward the postcranial skeleton is also reflected in our data. While continued visibility for morphological investigations is apparent, the impact of recently developed applications in bone chemistry and molecular anthropology is amply documented in our data, particularly during the more recent survey years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT The concepts of 'stress' and 'health' are foundational in physical anthropology as guidelines for interpreting human behavior and biocultural adaptation in the past and present. Though related, stress and health are not coterminous, and while the term 'health' encompasses some aspects of 'stress,' health refers to a more holistic condition beyond just physiological disruption, and is of considerable significance in contributing to anthropologists' understanding of humanity's lived experiences. Bioarchaeological interpretations of human health generally are made from datasets consisting of skeletal markers of stress, markers that result from (chronic) physiological disruption (e.g., porotic hyperostosis; linear enamel hypoplasia). Non-specific indicators of stress may measure episodes of stress and indicate that infection, disease, or nutritional deficiencies were present in a population, but in assessing these markers, bioarchaeologists are not measuring 'health' in the same way as are human biologists, medical anthropologists, or primatologists. Rather than continue to diverge on separate (albeit parallel) trajectories, bioarchaeologists are advised to pursue interlinkages with other subfields within physical anthropology toward bridging 'stress' and 'health.' The papers in this special symposium set include bioarchaeologists, human biologists, molecular anthropologists, and primatologists whose research develops this link between the concepts of 'stress' and 'health,' encouraging new avenues for bioarchaeologists to consider and reconsider health in past human populations. Am J Phys Anthropol 155:181-185, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]