Ethics in biological anthropology

Andre S, Wagner T, Bell JA. Attitudes and uses of archival materials among science-based anthropologists

While archival user studies have largely focused on humanities (and adjacent) scholars, this paper focuses on anthropologists engaged in scientific research. Based on qualitative results from an open-ended survey, we investigate how science-based anthropologists perceive and use archives in their work. We ask: How are science-based anthropologists and archaeologists reusing archival data in their research? What difficulties or barriers do they encounter in reusing archival data in scientific contexts? What attitudes or understandings about archival research are held by science-based anthropologists and archaeologists? Our findings primarily add to the body of literature about user experience in archives and more broadly to the emerging literature on archival data reuse. Major findings include (1) barriers and gatekeeping legacies that impact archival research and the ability of researchers to reuse data and (2) mixed perceptions about archives among researchers. We also discuss suggestions made by these communities of practice, and the ways that barriers to archival data reuse may stem from a lack of knowledge about core archival and information infrastructures among researcher communities. Together, this research showcases possible (re)uses of important primary source data in archives among scientific communities but highlights that barriers to access and misperceptions create a gap in exploiting that potential. We argue for a "re-imagining" of anthropological archives as relevant to contemporary communities and scientific pursuits toward a richer scientific research environment.

The modern Dental Cast Reference Collection from the University of Coimbra, Portugal

INTRODUCTION

Identified skeletal and skull collections are centrepiece for research in biological anthropology. However, until recently, the same relevance has not been placed on dental cast collections. This perspective evolved, mainly, with the research on population variation and human identification through dental characteristics. While dental collections exist throughout the world, their reports and documentation are scarce in the literature.

AIMS

This work aims to present the new Dental Cast Reference Collection - University of Coimbra (DCRC - UC) housed in the Laboratory of Prehistory of the Department of Life Sciences of the University of Coimbra (Portugal).

BASIC PROCEDURES

The modern dental cast collection (DCRC - UC) was created in 2016 for teaching and research purposes. The casts were obtained from volunteers who answered a brief questionnaire (sex, age, nationality, previous orthodontic and dental data) after informed consent.

MAIN FINDINGS

The collection includes the dental casts of 90 adult individuals of both sexes: 69 females and 21 males. The volunteers were students, teachers and visiting researchers of the Department of Life Sciences of the University of Coimbra. Age ranges from 17 to 49 years, including individuals of Portuguese (n=79) and non-Portuguese nationality (n=11). Lastly, the strategy of the conservation and storage conditions of the casts are underlined, a vital aspect of this working collection, emphasizing its protection while also allowing it to function as a usable resource.

PRINCIPAL CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the addition of new individuals to the dental cast collection is paused due to the COVID-19 pandemic, however the future work and expected expansion will require new logistic solutions. The DCRC - UC is an invaluable resource to both research and teaching activities.

Forensic Anthropology as a Discipline

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.

Abstract

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.

Navigating cross-cultural research: methodological and ethical considerations

The intensifying pace of research based on cross-cultural studies in the social sciences necessitates a discussion of the unique challenges of multi-sited research. Given an increasing demand for social scientists to expand their data collection beyond WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic) populations, there is an urgent need for transdisciplinary conversations on the logistical, scientific and ethical considerations inherent to this type of scholarship. As a group of social scientists engaged in cross-cultural research in psychology and anthropology, we hope to guide prospective cross-cultural researchers through some of the complex scientific and ethical challenges involved in such work: (a) study site selection, (b) community involvement and (c) culturally appropriate research methods. We aim to shed light on some of the difficult ethical quandaries of this type of research. Our recommendation emphasizes a community-centred approach, in which the desires of the community regarding research approach and methodology, community involvement, results communication and distribution, and data sharing are held in the highest regard by the researchers. We argue that such considerations are central to scientific rigour and the foundation of the study of human behaviour.

The ethics and logistics of field-based genetic paternity studies

The rapidly decreasing costs of generating genetic data sequencing and the ease of new DNA collection technologies have opened up new opportunities for anthropologists to conduct field-based genetic studies. An exciting aspect of this work comes from linking genetic data with the kinds of individual-level traits evolutionary anthropologists often rely on, such as those collected in long-term demographic and ethnographic studies. However, combining these two types of data raises a host of ethical questions related to the collection, analysis and reporting of such data. Here we address this conundrum by examining one particular case, the collection and analysis of paternity data. We are particularly interested in the logistics and ethics involved in genetic paternity testing in the localized settings where anthropologists often work. We discuss the particular issues related to paternity testing in these settings, including consent and disclosure, consideration of local identity and beliefs and developing a process of continued community engagement. We then present a case study of our own research in Namibia, where we developed a multi-tiered strategy for consent and community engagement, built around a double-blind procedure for data collection, analysis and reporting.

Paternity testing in anthropology raises ethical and methodological issues. We summarize these and describe a novel double-blind method used in our work.