Search

Despite developing prior to the appearance of secondary sexual characteristics of the skeleton, the permanent dentition exhibits sexual dimorphism. Therefore, teeth can serve as a means to estimate sex assigned at birth even in young individuals. This project takes a large global sample of maximum dimensions of the crown as well as measurements of the crown at the cervix to explore sexual dimorphism. Dimorphism is noted in teeth throughout the dental arcade, particularly in the canines. We provide sectioning points as well as the probability of correct classification (ranging from 50.9% to 81.3%) for each measurement to aid the practitioner in sex estimation from the dentition. This research provides a method to estimate sex without arbitrary population specifications. We argue for a global approach that incorporates more population variation to remove the need to estimate “ancestry,” (which in actuality is translated to a social race category) and therefore does not force sexual dimorphism‐related variation into these mutable and ambiguous categories. Further, this paper demonstrates the utility of the dentition as an additional indicator to aid with the estimation of sex assigned at birth in forensic anthropology. The goal of this research is to better understand the expression of sexual dimorphism across the skeleton in a global context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The medicolegal system relies on the ability of experts and non‐experts alike to make judgments about expertise and use those judgments to reach consequential decisions. Given the lack of standard criteria, mandatory certification, or licensure for establishing expertise required to practice forensic anthropology and testify as an expert witness, we sought to understand how individuals assess and identify expertise in forensic anthropology by using a social science tool called the Imitation Game. This tool assesses immersion in a specific area of study via discourse, with the premise that some individuals lacking expertise themselves imitate or attempt to pass as experts. For this project we recruited volunteers with varying expertise in forensic anthropology to participate in interviews which asked questions about the practice and structure of the discipline. Those interviews were transcribed, anonymized, and evaluated by other recruited individuals with varying expertise in forensic anthropology. Results found that judges who were experts in forensic anthropology performed better than non‐expert judges in determining who was not an expert in forensic anthropology based on their anonymized responses; however, nearly half of the non‐experts were still able to pass as experts in forensic anthropology. The difficulties in assessing expertise based on discourse interactions demonstrates the value and need for well‐defined credentials and mandatory certification to practice forensic anthropology. This study demonstrates that accurately identifying expertise in forensic anthropology may be challenging for both experts and non‐experts, especially when relying solely on interactional expertise rather than formal assessments of competency which directly elucidate contributory expertise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While the Anthropology Section of the AAFS recently implemented a student liaison position to amplify student voices and issues within the section, the entire academy has not equally embraced the role of students. Testimonial "Though I can claim an immigrant identity across three countries since birth, never had I felt more othered as an immigrant than in forensic anthropology or academia generally. While these statistics show that immigrants participate heavily in society, there is no demographic data available on immigrants within forensic anthropology, whether as students or professionals, although, anecdotally, this number is likely to be small. Three in four patents from the top ten patent-producing US universities have at least one immigrant inventor (Partnership for a New American Economy 2012), and one in four new companies are created by immigrant entrepreneurs (Blanding 2016). Immigrant students may face special concerns with regards to admission, higher tuition rates, financial aid eligibility, harassment from professors and fellow students, and forced return to their home country upon graduating. [Extracted from the article]

This piece, a conversation on the changing ethical obligations of forensic anthropology in the twenty-first century, arose out of myriad societal and disciplinary upheavals, including: insufficient ethical policies and recent debates about advocacy, activism, and antiracism in the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS); ongoing discussions on the intersection of forensic anthropology with important social movements (e.g., Black Lives Matter [BLM], LGBTQ+, immigrant advocacies); and critical examinations of our skeletal curation practices and our colonialist past and present. For example, more senior-level anthropologists were not involved in this discussion, and all of us who participated share the perspective that forensic anthropology should expand ethical practices to address social issues - with advocacy, activism, and antiracism playing critical roles. We started with several virtual discussions and living documents that identified two overarching themes that, we contend, require urgent responses from our field: (1) defining modern-day ethics in forensic anthropology; and (2) identifying the role(s) of advocacy, activism, and antiracism in forensic anthropology. For our advocacy, activism, and antiracism theme (2), we posed and answered the following two questions: (a) In what ways are advocacy, activism, and antiracism I essential i to the ethical practice of forensic anthropology?. [Extracted from the article]

There is broad discussion of the higher numbers of women in the forensic sciences, particularly when compared to other science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields. In this discussion, we focus on forensic anthropology. We begin with an historical overview of the role of women in the discipline; data are then provided that outline the numbers of women scholars and practitioners over time. We then explore the different roles of men and women in regard to leadership positions, professional awards, awarded grant-funding, job hiring trends, presentations at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) annual meeting, and publications in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. While the number of women in forensic anthropology is greatly increasing, the discipline has been slow to also grow the visibility of women in positions of leadership or to honor them with prestigious awards. One reason for this finding may be that women are subjected to bias and harassment, which may cause them to leave forensic anthropology at various points along the way, or lead to their contribution being less valued. These findings are discussed within the context of gendered expectations, and suggestions are provided on how to improve the retention of women as well as to diversify the discipline in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: There are currently no baseline data regarding the amount and types of case reports produced by forensic anthropologists. This research fills that gap by providing data on caseloads of practicing forensic anthropologists and identifying variables that may contribute to amount and type of casework. Materials and methods: A survey was distributed to practicing forensic anthropologists (n = 364) to explore number of case reports written and possible influential factors. Questions included demographic information, employment type, institution where master's degree or PhD were obtained, type of reports written, professional organization membership, certification, graduate research focus, among others. Data were analyzed using summary statistics, a random forest model, network analysis, and structural equation modeling. Results: The mean number of sole‐authored skeletal analysis reports per year was 12.33 and field recovery reports was 2 per year. Statistical analyses identified several variables influencing case loads which included: number of fieldwork reports per year, current employment, total number of cases analyzed, age, publication record, and institution of doctoral degree. Network analyses revealed that individuals in academic settings tended to have a bioarchaeological research focus from their graduate work, whereas those in an applied setting had a focus on forensic anthropology. Further, degree institution influenced employment type. Discussion/conclusions: These data address expectations for the number of cases analyzed by a forensic anthropologist per year and set a baseline for expectations and performance. Based on these results, we suggest that forensic anthropology is underutilized in the medicolegal death investigation system and more forensic anthropologists should be employed within Medical Examiner/Coroner's Offices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1992, Norm Sauer called for a language shift in which practitioners would move away from the socially loaded term "race" and replace it with the less provocative term "ancestry." While many heeded the call and moved towards ancestry in their research and reports, the actual approach to research and analysis did not change. In response to this change, there was a large growth in ancestry estimation method development in the early decade of the 2000s. However, the practice of ancestry estimation did not adequately incorporate evolutionary theory in interpretation or trait selection and continued with little critical reflection. In the past decade, there has been an increase in ancestry validation methods with little critique of the "race" concept or discussion of modern human variation or reference samples. To advance, forensic anthropologists need to reckon with the practice of ancestry estimation as it is currently practiced. We are calling for another reform in the axiom focusing on evolutionary theory, population history, trait selection, and population‐level reference samples. The practice needs to abandon the terms ancestry and race completely and recalibrate to an analysis of population affinity. Population affinity is a statistical approach based on the underlying population structure that would allow the understanding of how microevolutionary forces act in concert with historical events (e.g., colonization, the Transatlantic Slave Trade, etc.) to shape modern human variation. This is not to be confused with geographic ancestry that all too often can be perceived as interchangeable with social race and as an affirmation of the biological concept of race. It is time to critically evaluate the social and scientific implications of the current practice of ancestry estimation, and re‐frame our approach to studying and analyzing modern human variation through a population structure approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most biological anthropologists acknowledge that phenotypic human variation is distinct from human race. However, there is the potential for the research on human variation to be (mis)interpreted by the public as a reification of biological races. To explore this possible misuse, this study is a content analysis of articles (n = 1146) in the prominent race science journals Mankind Quarterly; The Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies; and The Occidental Quarterly. The goal is to investigate how race science employs research in biological and forensic anthropology to justify arguments. Articles were evaluated according to country affiliation, discipline, data sets, racial/ethnic terminology, position on racial hierarchy, position on racial segregation and eugenics, focus of study, views of scientific community, and the average power index (PI). Additionally, specific examples of (mis)appropriation are highlighted. Though the primary discipline represented in these publications is psychology, biological anthropology maintains a presence. Skeletal and dental traits, genetics, and paleoanthropological data are used to argue for biological racial differences and taxonomic distinctions. The research of forensic ancestry estimation was regularly used to legitimize the concept of biological race. While the PIs of the articles are low, they are present on the internet and circulate within social media. The continued use of biological anthropology to reinforce racial essentialism should force practitioners to question the ethical implications of their research. Finally, we provide discussion regarding shifts in methodology and terminology to address how biological and forensic anthropologists can rectify the damage this research may directly and indirectly cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand the implications of the forensic anthropological practice of "ancestry" estimation, we explore terminology that has been employed in forensic anthropological research. The goal is to evaluate how such terms can often circulate within social contexts as a result, which may center forensic anthropologists as constituting "race" itself through analysis and categorization. This research evaluates terminology used in anthropological articles of the Journal of Forensic Sciences between 1972 and 2020 (n = 314). Terminology was placed into two categories: classifiers and descriptors. Classifiers were standardized into one of five options: "race," "ancestry," "population," "ethnic," or "other." Descriptors included terms used to describe individuals within these classificatory systems. We also compared these terms to those in the NamUs database and the U.S. census. Our results found that the terms "ancestry" and "race" are often conflated and "ancestry" largely supplanted "race" in the 1990s without a similar change in research approach. The NamUs and census terminology are not the same as that used in forensic anthropological research; illustrating a disconnect in the terms used to identify the missing, unidentified, and in social contexts with those used in anthropological research. We provide histories of all of these terms and conclude with suggestions for how to use terminology in the future. It is important for forensic anthropologists to be cognizant of the terms they use in medicolegal contexts, publications, and in public and/or professional spaces. The continued use of misrepresentative and improper language further marginalizes groups and perpetuates oppression rooted in systemic racism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The articles in this special issue grew from a symposium at the 2020 American Academy of Forensic Sciences Annual Scientific meeting, with the same title as this introduction. The symposium focused on current research and practice of ancestry estimation in forensic anthropology. The symposium concluded with a discussion of the value (or lack thereof) of ancestry estimation as a standard component of the forensic anthropological biological profile. The articles constituting this volume address these questions: What is the current state of race/ancestry estimation in practice? What terminology should we use to describe patterned variation among human populations? How do we sample contemporary populations, and how long are studies built on such samples applicable? What role does genomic data play? Should race/ancestry remain a core component of the biological profile? Further, the issue includes an examination of ancestry estimation in teaching and community outreach. While fine points are still up for debate among these authors, there is general agreement that any future of ancestry estimation must be based in cultural context and evolutionary theory, be sensitive to the importance of terminology employed, and be iteratively reflexive about the relative costs and benefits of this work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of American Anthropologist is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The qualifications for a discipline are composed of the education and/or training requirements considered necessary to provide individuals with adequate knowledge to perform discipline-related tasks, including certification or licensing (Passalacqua & Pilloud 2018). Currently there are few available guidelines and no standards for the qualifications of a forensic anthropologist. To examine the qualifications of current practicing forensic anthropologists and to generate consensus-based criteria for the development of standards for qualifications for forensic anthropology, the authors generated an electronic survey. Results demonstrate that the qualifications of practicing forensic anthropologists are varied and do not always align with the qualifications currently outlined by the Scientific Working Group for Forensic Anthropology or the American Board of Forensic Anthropology. These findings do not mean these individuals are unqualified to practice forensic anthropology, but rather that there is currently little oversight or assistance for those individuals who do not fit the current models of perceived qualification, and no means of determining who does or does not have the adequate knowledge to perform forensic anthropological analyses. As forensic anthropology grows as a discipline, the standardization of qualifications will become increasingly important, both in terms of setting requirements for education and training and for the certification of practitioners. Further, there need to be clearer standards for education and training, which are currently lacking in the discipline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of dental morphology to estimate ancestry has become more prevalent within forensic anthropology, and several new methods have been published (e.g., Edgar 2005, 2013; Irish 2015; Scott et al. 2018). While these methods represent great advances, they are lacking in modern Asian reference samples. As such, they may be unable to adequately differentiate Asian individuals from those who express similar dental morphology (i.e., Hispanics and Native Americans). This study explores dental morphological population variation of various skeletal samples in an effort to suggest areas of improvement for methods of ancestry estimation. Biological distance analyses were conducted on dental morphological data from a Mexican skeletal collection housed at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México in Mexico City (n = 88), Hispanic dental casts housed at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque (n = 71), a Japanese skeletal sample at Chiba University in Chiba, Japan (n = 96), and a comparative global data set collected by T. Hanihara. Clear patterns emerge that align with the Sinodont/Sundadont dental variation, where Native American samples cluster with East Asian samples (Sinodont) and Southeast Asian groups cluster with Melanesia, Papua New Guinea, and Australia (Sundadont). The two Hispanic samples are found to be distinct from these Asian samples and cluster with Macro- European and West African samples. These results highlight the complexity of Asian and Asian-derived populations and underscore the need for appropriate references samples in method creation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Few sex estimation methods have been developed for East Asian populations in forensic anthropology. Furthermore, odontometric techniques, particularly including cervical measurements, are underutilized by forensic anthropologists in the construction of the biological profile. This research evaluates the use of logistic regression and linear discriminant function analysis with standard crown and cervical measurements of the dentition for the estimation of sex in a contemporary Japanese sample (n = 97). While logistic regression produced equations with the highest overall correct classification rates, discriminant function equations resulted in less of a sex bias of correct estimation. Cervical and buccolingual measurements were most effective at correct allocation of individuals. This study successfully demonstrates the applicability of odontometrics, particularly cervical measurements, in the estimation of sex and the necessity for population-specific methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dental morphology is becoming increasingly visible in forensic anthropology as part of the estimation of ancestry. As methods are developed based on these data, it is important to understand the role of observer error in data collection and method application. In this study, 10 observers collected dental morphological data on 19 traits on the same set of nine plaques. Various measures of interrater reliability were calculated to assess observer error. Data were then input into one of three ancestry estimation methods based on dental morphology to understand the role of observer error in these methods. Results show low rater reliability for all dental morphological traits when all 10 observers are compared. Rater reliability increases when only experienced observers are compared and traits are dichotomized. Further, differences in trait scores by observers resulted in disparate estimations of ancestry in each of the methods. While observer error appears to be an issue in dental morphological methods of ancestry estimation, these problems can be addressed. An argument is made for advanced training in dental anthropology in laboratories and in graduate programs. Further, methods need to test for and employ traits with high rater agreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study tests the relationship between third molar impaction and its concomitant effect on age estimation methods. Data were collected on radiographs of males analyzed in the Defense POW/MIA Accounting Agency Laboratory (n = 114). Radiographs of skeletonized individuals were scored for dental development, and age was assigned based on the appropriate ancestry‐based method. Differences between identified age and estimated dental age were assessed to determine whether molar impaction affected root development and age estimations. Results indicate that impacted teeth tend to be underdeveloped and result in age estimates that are too low. While these results are of note to anthropologists and odontologists performing dental age estimates, more work is needed to explore the effect of impaction on development among a more diverse sample. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study evaluates population variation of eight cranial morphoscopic traits using samples of known southwest Hispanics ( n = 72), Guatemalans ( n = 106), American Blacks ( n = 146), and American Whites ( n = 218). We applied the support vector machine ( SVM) method to build a prediction model based on a subsample (20%) of the data; the remainder of the data was used as a test sample. The SVM approach effectively differentiated between the four groups with correct classification rates between 72% (Guatemalan group) and 94% (American Black group). However, when the Guatemalan and southwest Hispanic samples were pooled, the same model correctly classified all groups with a higher degree of accuracy (American Black = 96%; American White = 77%; and the pooled Hispanic sample = 91%). This study also identified significant differences between the two Hispanic groups in six of the eight traits using univariate statistical tests. These results speak to the unique population histories of these samples and the current use of the term 'Hispanic' within forensic anthropology. Finally, we argue that the SVM can be used as a classification model for ancestry estimation in a forensic context and as a diagnostic tool may broaden the application of morphoscopic trait data for the assessment of ancestry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the hardest tissue in the body, teeth have the potential to offer a wealth of biological information to the forensic anthropologist, which can include the assessment of ancestry. Using a large data set of dental measurements, the efficacy of mesiodistal and buccolingual tooth dimensions to discriminate between broad, geographically based groups is explored. A general pattern is identified: African populations have the largest teeth, Asians possess teeth of intermediate size, and Europeans have the smallest teeth. In a discriminant function analysis using crown measurements of all teeth (mandibular and maxillary and excluding the third molar), individuals were correctly classified in 71.3% of cases. When the sex of the individual is known, classification is improved up to 88.1% in females and 71.9% of males (cross-validated). Based on these results, we argue that dental metrics can be regularly employed as part of the development of the biological profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Forensic anthropology in the United States is a specialization within the overall field of anthropology. Forensic anthropologists are specially educated and trained to search, recover, and examine human remains within a medicolegal context. Over time, forensic anthropology has become increasingly specialized and distinct from other specializations within anthropology. As such, we argue that forensic anthropology should be considered its own discipline, with a unique knowledge base, separate from other similar forms of anthropology, such a bioarchaeology. We argue that forensic anthropologists have unique expertise, making them the only type of anthropologist qualified to perform medicolegal examinations of human remains. Finally, we contend that to perform or represent yourself as a forensic anthropologist without the appropriate expertise is ethical misconduct. The value of this paper is that it explains the importance of expertise and knowledge, and how forensic anthropology has diverged from other specializations of anthropology enough to be considered its own discipline. This paper explores the current state of forensic anthropology in the United States as a distinct discipline. Forensic anthropology has become increasingly specialized and the need for strengthened professionalization is becoming paramount. This includes a need for clearly defined qualifications, training, standards of practice, certification processes, and ethical guidelines. Within this discussion, the concept of expertise is explored in relation to professionalization and practice, as both bioarchaeology and forensic anthropology have different areas of specialist knowledge, and therefore unique expertise. As working outside one's area of expertise is an ethical violation, it is important for professional organizations to outline requisite qualifications, develop standards and best practice guidelines, and enforce robust preventive ethical codes in order to serve both their professional members and relevant stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This project examined the salaries of forensic anthropologists in the United States. Additionally, the salaries of forensic anthropologists employed in academia were compared to those of other academic anthropologists. The goal of this project was to develop baseline data in terms of salaries for forensic anthropologists while also examining various factors that may affect forensic anthropology salaries. Salary information is important because salary transparency narrows wage disparities, reduces favoritism and discrimination, increases the bargaining power of employees, and potentially causes employers to focus more on salary differentiation in terms of productivity and seniority; essentially, wage transparency generates greater equity among employees (Estlund 2014). In order to examine salaries in forensic anthropology, internet search engines were used to find open-access salary data for individuals currently listed as non-student members of the anthropology section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences and/or the American Board of Forensic Anthropology. All variables were analyzed using random forest models. Results found that in all models, there were no differences in salary between men and women. Further, no significant differences were found between anthropology subfields in academia. Importantly, years since terminal degree was the most important variable affecting salary in all models, with academic rank being the most important variable for individuals employed in the academic sector. Further, these results demonstrate inconsistencies in pay for forensic anthropologists, especially for those working in the applied sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A glacial environment is a unique setting that can alter human remains in characteristic ways. This study describes glacial dynamics and how glaciers can be understood as taphonomic agents. Using a case study of human remains recovered from Colony Glacier, Alaska, a glacial taphonomic signature is outlined that includes: (1) movement of remains, (2) dispersal of remains, (3) altered bone margins, (4) splitting of skeletal elements, and (5) extensive soft tissue preservation and adipocere formation. As global glacier area is declining in the current climate, there is the potential for more materials of archaeological and medicolegal significance to be exposed. It is therefore important for the forensic anthropologist to have an idea of the taphonomy in this setting and to be able to differentiate glacial effects from other taphonomic agents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]