{"title":"考古学中复杂系统理论的过去、现在和未来","authors":"Dylan S. Davis","doi":"10.1007/s10814-023-09193-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Throughout the history of archaeology, researchers have evaluated human societies in terms of systems and systems interactions. Complex systems theory (CST), which emerged in the 1980s, is a framework that can explain the emergence of new organizational forms. Its ability to capture nonlinear dynamics and account for human agency make CST a powerful analytical framework for archaeologists. While CST has been present within archaeology for several decades (most notably through the use of concepts like resilience and complex adaptive systems), recent increases in the use of methods like network analysis and agent-based modeling are accelerating the use of CST among archaeologists. This article reviews complex systems approaches and their relationship to past and present archaeological thought. In particular, CST has made important advancements in studies of adaptation and resilience, cycles of social and political development, and the identification of scaling relationships in human systems. Ultimately, CST helps reveal important patterns and relationships that are pivotal for understanding human systems and the relationships that define different societies.</p>","PeriodicalId":47005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Research","volume":"9 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Past, Present, and Future of Complex Systems Theory in Archaeology\",\"authors\":\"Dylan S. Davis\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10814-023-09193-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Throughout the history of archaeology, researchers have evaluated human societies in terms of systems and systems interactions. Complex systems theory (CST), which emerged in the 1980s, is a framework that can explain the emergence of new organizational forms. Its ability to capture nonlinear dynamics and account for human agency make CST a powerful analytical framework for archaeologists. While CST has been present within archaeology for several decades (most notably through the use of concepts like resilience and complex adaptive systems), recent increases in the use of methods like network analysis and agent-based modeling are accelerating the use of CST among archaeologists. This article reviews complex systems approaches and their relationship to past and present archaeological thought. In particular, CST has made important advancements in studies of adaptation and resilience, cycles of social and political development, and the identification of scaling relationships in human systems. Ultimately, CST helps reveal important patterns and relationships that are pivotal for understanding human systems and the relationships that define different societies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47005,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Archaeological Research\",\"volume\":\"9 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Archaeological Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-023-09193-z\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-023-09193-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Past, Present, and Future of Complex Systems Theory in Archaeology
Throughout the history of archaeology, researchers have evaluated human societies in terms of systems and systems interactions. Complex systems theory (CST), which emerged in the 1980s, is a framework that can explain the emergence of new organizational forms. Its ability to capture nonlinear dynamics and account for human agency make CST a powerful analytical framework for archaeologists. While CST has been present within archaeology for several decades (most notably through the use of concepts like resilience and complex adaptive systems), recent increases in the use of methods like network analysis and agent-based modeling are accelerating the use of CST among archaeologists. This article reviews complex systems approaches and their relationship to past and present archaeological thought. In particular, CST has made important advancements in studies of adaptation and resilience, cycles of social and political development, and the identification of scaling relationships in human systems. Ultimately, CST helps reveal important patterns and relationships that are pivotal for understanding human systems and the relationships that define different societies.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Archaeological Research publishes the most recent international research summaries on a broad range of topics and geographical areas. The articles are intended to present the current state-of-the-discipline in regard to a particular geographic area or specific research topic or theme. This authoritative review journal improves access to the growing body of information and literature through the publication of original critical articles, each in a 25-40 page format.2-Year Impact Factor: 4.056 (2017) 5-Year Impact Factor: 4.512 (2017)2 out of 85 on the Anthropology listIncluded in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) PLUS The European Reference Index for the Humanities and the Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS) was created and developed by European researchers under the coordination of the Standing Committee for the Humanities (SCH) of the European Science Foundation (ESF). https://dbh.nsd.uib.no/publiseringskanaler/erihplus/about/indexSCImago Journal and Country Rank (SJR) 2018: 1.7102 out of 263 on the Archeology (Arts and Humanities) list3 out of 254 on the Archeology list2 out of 131 on the General Arts and Humanities listSJR is a measure of the journal’s relative impact in its field, based on its number of citations and number of articles per publication year.Source Normalised Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 2.112The SNIP measures contextual citation impact by weighting citations based on the total number of citations in a subject field. The impact of a single citation is given higher value in subject areas where citations are less likely, and vice versa.CiteScore 2018: 3.86Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List. For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list.htm
SCImago Journal and Country Rank (SJR) 2011 1.227 Archeology 1 out of 96 Archeology (Arts and Humanities) 1 out of 59 Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous) 1 out of 243