Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37588390›Full record

ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2020

Learner-driven innovation in the stone tool technology of early

Jayne Wilkins

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Evolutionary human sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Jayne WilkinsAustralian Research Centre for Human Evolution, Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia; and Human Evolution Research Institute, University of Cape Town, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2586-107X
Griffith University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current perspectives of stone tool technology tend to emphasize homogeneity in tool forms and core reduction strategies across time and space. This homogeneity is understood to represent shared cultural traditions that are passed down through the generations. This represents a top-down perspective on how and why stone tools are manufactured that largely restricts technological agency to experts, adults and teachers. However, just as bottom-up processes driven by children and youth influence technological innovation today, they are likely to have played a role in the past. This paper considers evidence from the archaeological record of early

Indexed as

cultural transmissioninnovationLithic technologyMiddle Stone Agesocial learning

Identifiers

PMID37588390
PMCPMC10427492
OpenAlexW3040980763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.