Article2004

Reconsidering the Auricular Surface as an Indicator of Age at Death

193 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Forensic Sciences

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Forensic Anthropology and Bioarchaeology Studies Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology Forensic Entomology and Diptera Studies

Abstract

Using standards established by Lovejoy et al. to estimate age at death from auricular surface morphology, 266 individuals of documented age, sex, and ancestry from the Terry and Bass Donated Collections were scored. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) indicates that for the factors that could be controlled, age is the sole influence on auricular surface morphology. Ancestry and sex had no significant effect on auricular phase expression. No evidence of secular changes was detected when comparing the Terry Collection (early 20th century) to the Bass Collection (later 20th century). Pearson correlations reveal that several of the subcomponents of the auricular surface (superior and inferior demifaces, left and right sides, transverse organization, texture) correspond with age equally well, although a combined scoring of all features performs slightly better than any one indicator taken alone. Not surprisingly, only 33% of the sample was correctly aged when using the 5-year age ranges provided by Lovejoy et al., suggesting that the published ranges are much too narrow to be used in forensic contexts. To assess the variation in age per phase, standard descriptive statistics and error ranges were calculated and can be employed by forensic anthropologists when estimating the age of an unidentified decedent. Because the mean ages of some of the eight phases did not differ significantly from one another, a modified six-phase system is presented. The auricular surface performs as well as any other single skeletal indicator of adult age. This research suggests that a statistically-informed approach should be taken in order to fully understand the drawbacks and limitations of any aging method.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 193 citations exist upstream.

References

1990Skeletal age determination based on the os pubis: A comparison of the Acsádi-Nemeskéri and Suchey-Brooks methods 1985Chronological metamorphosis of the auricular surface of the ilium: A new method for the determination of adult skeletal age at death 1991Advances in dental anthropology 1955The human skeleton in forensic medicine. I.1998Forensic Osteology: Advances in the Identification of Human Remains 2002Age estimation from the auricular surface of the ilium: A revised method 1920Age changes in the pubic bone. I. The male white pubis 1984Age Estimation from the Rib by Phase Analysis: White Males

Cited by

2007Comparison of Four Skeletal Methods for the Estimation of Age at Death on White and Black Adults*2011Current Practices by Forensic Anthropologists in Adult Skeletal Age Estimation*2019Estimation of age in forensic anthropology: historical perspective and recent methodological advances 2015The (mis)use of adult age estimates in osteology 2009Development of a method to estimate skeletal age at death in adults using the acetabulum and the auricular surface on a Portuguese population

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.