⌘+K

Pulse Explore Communities Researchers Journals

Home Communities Explore

August 3, 2025Peer Community In ArchaeologyOpen Access

Review of: Replication report for Marwick (2025) “Is archaeology a science?”, including new data from OpenAlex. Round#1/Reviewer#1

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Key Points

This review aims to evaluate the reproducibility of the findings from Marwick's work on archaeology as a science.
Analyze new data from OpenAlex relative to Marwick's original research
Assess the reproducibility of experimental findings in archaeology
Review literature on archaeology's scientific basis
Identified key factors affecting reproducibility in archaeological studies
Discussed new data's implications for established claims about archaeology as a science
Noted a lack of consensus in the community regarding archaeology's scientific status

No abstract yet

We only have this paper's title and publication details.

Read it at the source→

Implication

This review analyzes reproducibility in archaeology, correlating new data with existing findings.

Abstract

The reproducibility of an experiment is one of the bases of the

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Mathias Bellat (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d8946e6c1944d70ce05627 https://doi.org/10.24072/pci.archaeo.100616.rev11

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Keep reading

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

1Replication report for Marwick (2025) “Is archaeology a science?”, including new data from OpenAlex2025
2Replication as Salvation: The Politics of Open Science and the Recurring Allure of Scientism in Deep-Time Lithic StudiesOriginal Research · 2026
3Metascience won't solve the replication crisis: Replications across the pyramid of culture change2025
4Thirty agent-assisted replications, published as nanopublications: the honest debriefOriginal Research · 2026
5On the process and value of direct close replications: A rejoinder to Shafir and Cheek’s (2024) commentary on Chandrashekar et al. (2021)2025

More related papers

Replication marketplaces would help science to become more self-correcting2024
ARA2026
Title Pending 115012024

More from Peer Community In Archaeology

Recommendation of: Bridging Interdisciplinary Research Data Management and Data Science through Modular Research Processes. Round#2Sat,
Author response of: Evaluating commercial DNA extraction kits for bacterial community profiling in waterlogged archaeological wood. Round#1Mon,