 | |
| Discipline | Archaeology |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Edited by | |
| Publication details | |
Former name(s) | Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, Archaeological Method and Theory, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory |
| History | 1978–present |
| Publisher | |
| Frequency | Quarterly |
| Hybrid | |
| 2.828 (2019) | |
| Standard abbreviations | |
| ISO 4 | J. Archaeol. Method Theory |
| Indexing | |
| ISSN | 1072-5369 (print) 1573-7764 (web) |
| LCCN | 2004233369 |
| JSTOR | 10431691 |
| OCLC no. | 44162171 |
| Links | |
The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is a peer-reviewed academic journal which focuses on methodology and theory in archaeology. It is published quarterly by Springer Science+Business Media. [1]
Contents
The journal originated in an annual edited volume series, Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, established by Michael Schiffer in 1978. [2] The purpose of the series was to publish review articles covering current issues in archaeological theory. [3] [4] It was published by Academic Press between 1978 and 1987, and by Plenum Press between 1989 and 1993 as Archaeological Method and Theory. [5] The series moved to a quarterly journal format in 1994, in order to expand its scope from reviews to other types of papers. [5] Schiffer continued as editor until 2000. From 2000 to 2018, it was edited by Catherine M. Cameron and James M. Skibo. [2] The current editors are Valentine Roux and Margaret E. Beck. [6]
The journal is often associated with the processual, behavioural, and evolutionary schools of archaeological theory, but aims to "welcome 'all theoretical archaeology'". [2] For example, a landmark paper by Ian Hodder, which established the name post-processual archaeology for the theoretical reaction to processual archaeology he led in the early 1980s, was published in volume 8 of Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory. [7] [8]
In 2016 a special issue of the journal was dedicated to papers that challenged a binary approach to gender, which included perspectives from queer and transgender archaeologies. [9]