Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40680096›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

The dichotomy of human decision-making: An experimental assessment of stone tool efficiency.

David Nora, João Marreiros, Walter Gneisinger, Antonella Pedergnana, Telmo Pereira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors.

David NoraThe Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2948-776X
João MarreirosICArEHB, Interdisciplinary Center for Archaeology and Evolution Human Behaviour, Universidade do Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, Faro, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3399-8765
Walter GneisingerLaboratory for Traceology and Controlled Experiments (TraCEr), MONREPOS - Archaeological Research Centre and Museum for Human Behavioural Evolution, Leibniz Zentrum für Archäologie, Germany, Schloss MONREPOS 2, Neuwied, Germany.
Antonella PedergnanaSouth Tyrol Archeological Museum, Bozen, Italy.
Telmo PereiraCGeo - Centro de Geociências, Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7588-2090

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The physical properties of distinct raw materials, such as hardness, homogeneity, and grain size, have been recurrently suggested as some of the key reasons for human decision-making, namely the selection, production, and use of stone implements in the past. However, little is known, concerning the relationship between stone tools and human behaviour and how this is reflected in the variability seen in the archaeological record. Therefore, investigating stone tools' properties and performance brings fundamental insights into identifying and understanding the origins of some of the major human technological behavioural traits. In this study, we aim to address this topic by measuring the variability of the properties of lithic raw materials from the perspective of tool use. A controlled experiment was designed to test the mechanical performance with a focus on the efficiency (ratio between effectiveness and durability) of four distinct raw materials (quartzite, dacite, flint, and obsidian). Our study addresses the null hypothesis: "Edge efficiency does not vary according to the different lithic raw materials." Efficiency is assessedby the combination of penetration depth (proxy to measure effectiveness) and edge wear (proxy to measure durability). These two variables were measured, and the results correlated with the physical properties of various raw materials, including hardness and grain size. Our results show significant differences in the efficiency between the different types of raw materials. The outcome demonstrates that the variables by which we test the edge efficiency of lithic raw materials are highly relevant for raw material selection and, consequently, may have been of utmost importance in influencing the decision-aking process of past hunter-gatherers. A decrease in tool efficiency during use may have constrained daily activities, necessitating technological adaptations. This strongly suggests that each raw material used in archaeological contexts to produce blanks should be evaluated for its efficiency. In addition, it may be pertinent to extend this approach to other blunt artefactssuch as scrapers, burins, anvils, and hammerstones when investigating aspects of interconnected behaviours such as artefact variability, resource economy, group mobility, and site function. Such choices and decisions are coded in the archaeological record and represent cultural factors that were transmitted through learning and likely triggered the human decision-making process of past hunter-gatherers.

Indexed as

Decision MakingTool Use BehaviorArchaeologyHardnessHumans

Identifiers

PMID40680096
PMCPMC12273975

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.