Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains

A Critical Evaluation of Methods.

Lyle W Konigsberg, Bradley J. Adams

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Much of the literature that deals with various quantification techniques comes from faunal analysis. Generally, there are two goals of these techniques when working with animal remains. The first is to quantify the deposited/recovered faunal assemblage and from these data extrapolate information about past hominid behavior. The results of such studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning human diet, animal procurement strategies, and predator-prey relationships. The second goal is directed toward quantifying the recovered faunal assemblage to reconstruct the living community of animals. The results of these types of studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning faunal turnover and succession, reconstruction of paleoenvironmental conditions, and geographic faunal patterns. When one is working with commingled human remains, the goal of quantification is obviously to estimate the total number of dead, and many of the techniques developed for faunal analysis are not appropriate. Exceptions are the minimum number of individuals (MNI) and the Lincoln Index (LI). In paleodemographic studies, estimation of the number of individuals is critical for the interpretation of past cultures, whereas in the forensic context, it is vital for the identification process and for possible criminal trials. In general, most discussions concerning the quantification of commingled human remains revolve around the MNI. Certainly one of the reasons for the popularity of the MNI is the ease of its calculation. Another reason is that physical anthropologists may not be familiar with other options. Research has shown that the Lincoln Index is a viable option for dealing with human remains, and one that is not significantly more complicated than the MNI in its calculation. A more statistically accurate modification of the LI has been presented; it is called the most likely number of individuals, or MLNI. As such, a significant portion of this chapter discusses the MLNI in place of the LI. These alternatives to the MNI provide physical anthropologists with more analytical power when dealing with commingled remains.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationCommingled Human Remains
Subtitle of host publicationMethods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification
PublisherElsevier Inc.
Pages193-220
Number of pages28
ISBN (Electronic)9780124059184
ISBN (Print)9780124058897
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 17 2014

Fingerprint

evaluation
quantification
animal
turnover
popularity
reconstruction
interpretation
community

Keywords

  • Abrasion
  • Confidence interval
  • Disarticulation
  • Dispersal
  • Fossilization
  • Fragmentation
  • Highest density region
  • Lincoln Index
  • Minimum number of individuals
  • Most likely number of individuals
  • Quantification technique
  • Scattering
  • Taphonomy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Konigsberg, L. W., & Adams, B. J. (2014). Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains: A Critical Evaluation of Methods. In Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification (pp. 193-220). Elsevier Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5

Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains : A Critical Evaluation of Methods. / Konigsberg, Lyle W; Adams, Bradley J.

Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification. Elsevier Inc., 2014. p. 193-220.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Konigsberg, LW & Adams, BJ 2014, Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains: A Critical Evaluation of Methods. in Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification. Elsevier Inc., pp. 193-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5
Konigsberg LW, Adams BJ. Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains: A Critical Evaluation of Methods. In Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification. Elsevier Inc. 2014. p. 193-220 https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5
Konigsberg, Lyle W ; Adams, Bradley J. / Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains : A Critical Evaluation of Methods. Commingled Human Remains: Methods in Recovery, Analysis, and Identification. Elsevier Inc., 2014. pp. 193-220
@inbook{ffcd9aab621143369964a0eabe394bc9,
title = "Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains: A Critical Evaluation of Methods.",
abstract = "Much of the literature that deals with various quantification techniques comes from faunal analysis. Generally, there are two goals of these techniques when working with animal remains. The first is to quantify the deposited/recovered faunal assemblage and from these data extrapolate information about past hominid behavior. The results of such studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning human diet, animal procurement strategies, and predator-prey relationships. The second goal is directed toward quantifying the recovered faunal assemblage to reconstruct the living community of animals. The results of these types of studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning faunal turnover and succession, reconstruction of paleoenvironmental conditions, and geographic faunal patterns. When one is working with commingled human remains, the goal of quantification is obviously to estimate the total number of dead, and many of the techniques developed for faunal analysis are not appropriate. Exceptions are the minimum number of individuals (MNI) and the Lincoln Index (LI). In paleodemographic studies, estimation of the number of individuals is critical for the interpretation of past cultures, whereas in the forensic context, it is vital for the identification process and for possible criminal trials. In general, most discussions concerning the quantification of commingled human remains revolve around the MNI. Certainly one of the reasons for the popularity of the MNI is the ease of its calculation. Another reason is that physical anthropologists may not be familiar with other options. Research has shown that the Lincoln Index is a viable option for dealing with human remains, and one that is not significantly more complicated than the MNI in its calculation. A more statistically accurate modification of the LI has been presented; it is called the most likely number of individuals, or MLNI. As such, a significant portion of this chapter discusses the MLNI in place of the LI. These alternatives to the MNI provide physical anthropologists with more analytical power when dealing with commingled remains.",
keywords = "Abrasion, Confidence interval, Disarticulation, Dispersal, Fossilization, Fragmentation, Highest density region, Lincoln Index, Minimum number of individuals, Most likely number of individuals, Quantification technique, Scattering, Taphonomy",
author = "Konigsberg, {Lyle W} and Adams, {Bradley J.}",
year = "2014",
month = "6",
day = "17",
doi = "10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780124058897",
pages = "193--220",
booktitle = "Commingled Human Remains",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Estimating the Number of Individuals Represented by Commingled Human Remains

T2 - A Critical Evaluation of Methods.

AU - Konigsberg, Lyle W

AU - Adams, Bradley J.

PY - 2014/6/17

Y1 - 2014/6/17

N2 - Much of the literature that deals with various quantification techniques comes from faunal analysis. Generally, there are two goals of these techniques when working with animal remains. The first is to quantify the deposited/recovered faunal assemblage and from these data extrapolate information about past hominid behavior. The results of such studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning human diet, animal procurement strategies, and predator-prey relationships. The second goal is directed toward quantifying the recovered faunal assemblage to reconstruct the living community of animals. The results of these types of studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning faunal turnover and succession, reconstruction of paleoenvironmental conditions, and geographic faunal patterns. When one is working with commingled human remains, the goal of quantification is obviously to estimate the total number of dead, and many of the techniques developed for faunal analysis are not appropriate. Exceptions are the minimum number of individuals (MNI) and the Lincoln Index (LI). In paleodemographic studies, estimation of the number of individuals is critical for the interpretation of past cultures, whereas in the forensic context, it is vital for the identification process and for possible criminal trials. In general, most discussions concerning the quantification of commingled human remains revolve around the MNI. Certainly one of the reasons for the popularity of the MNI is the ease of its calculation. Another reason is that physical anthropologists may not be familiar with other options. Research has shown that the Lincoln Index is a viable option for dealing with human remains, and one that is not significantly more complicated than the MNI in its calculation. A more statistically accurate modification of the LI has been presented; it is called the most likely number of individuals, or MLNI. As such, a significant portion of this chapter discusses the MLNI in place of the LI. These alternatives to the MNI provide physical anthropologists with more analytical power when dealing with commingled remains.

AB - Much of the literature that deals with various quantification techniques comes from faunal analysis. Generally, there are two goals of these techniques when working with animal remains. The first is to quantify the deposited/recovered faunal assemblage and from these data extrapolate information about past hominid behavior. The results of such studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning human diet, animal procurement strategies, and predator-prey relationships. The second goal is directed toward quantifying the recovered faunal assemblage to reconstruct the living community of animals. The results of these types of studies attempt to draw conclusions concerning faunal turnover and succession, reconstruction of paleoenvironmental conditions, and geographic faunal patterns. When one is working with commingled human remains, the goal of quantification is obviously to estimate the total number of dead, and many of the techniques developed for faunal analysis are not appropriate. Exceptions are the minimum number of individuals (MNI) and the Lincoln Index (LI). In paleodemographic studies, estimation of the number of individuals is critical for the interpretation of past cultures, whereas in the forensic context, it is vital for the identification process and for possible criminal trials. In general, most discussions concerning the quantification of commingled human remains revolve around the MNI. Certainly one of the reasons for the popularity of the MNI is the ease of its calculation. Another reason is that physical anthropologists may not be familiar with other options. Research has shown that the Lincoln Index is a viable option for dealing with human remains, and one that is not significantly more complicated than the MNI in its calculation. A more statistically accurate modification of the LI has been presented; it is called the most likely number of individuals, or MLNI. As such, a significant portion of this chapter discusses the MLNI in place of the LI. These alternatives to the MNI provide physical anthropologists with more analytical power when dealing with commingled remains.

KW - Abrasion

KW - Confidence interval

KW - Disarticulation

KW - Dispersal

KW - Fossilization

KW - Fragmentation

KW - Highest density region

KW - Lincoln Index

KW - Minimum number of individuals

KW - Most likely number of individuals

KW - Quantification technique

KW - Scattering

KW - Taphonomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84942597520&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84942597520&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5

DO - 10.1016/B978-0-12-405889-7.00009-5

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780124058897

SP - 193

EP - 220

BT - Commingled Human Remains

PB - Elsevier Inc.

ER -