ArticlePloS one2025
Multivariate analyses of Aurignacian and Gravettian personal ornaments support cultural continuity in the Early Upper Palaeolithic.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Châtelperronian cultural diversity at its western limits: Shell beads and pigments from La Roche-à-Pierrot, Saint-Césaire.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditionally, lithic artefacts have served as the principal proxy for the definition of archaeological cultures in the Upper Paleolithic. However, the culture-historical framework in use, constructed unsystematically and shaped by regional research traditions, features a number of widely acknowledged drawbacks. Here we use personal ornaments to explore the nature of Early Upper Paleolithic cultural entities and establish to what extent they represent distinct or evolving cultural adaptations. We present an analysis of an updated georeferenced dataset composed of personal ornaments coming from two key successive Upper Paleolithic technocomplexes, the Aurignacian (42-34,000 years ago) and the Gravettian (34-24,000 years ago). Using a range of multivariate statistics, we demonstrate that, at both European and regional scales, people belonging to these technocomplexes wore similar personal ornaments, though fully-shaped personal ornaments appear more different between technocomplexes. We additionally show that the variability of the Aurignacian ornaments suggests more fragmented cultural clusters compared to the Gravettian, implying more extensive symbolic networks in the latter. Despite a long-standing consensus based on other archaeological proxies, which emphasises the dissimilarity between these cultural entities, our results demonstrate the complex nature of Upper Paleolithic cultures which are characterised by discontinuities in economic and technical systems and continuity in the culturalisation of the body.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.