Chapter 10 Open Review
Open Review means that you can freely read the book and easily help to make it better. You can offer suggestions by make annotations using hypothes.is, an open source annotation system. This is a very simple system for interacting with the book. If you are familiar with GitHub or Git, you can also comment using GitHub’s issue tracker for the book, or make a pull request. In addition to these feedback options, this website for the book will be collecting your implicit feedback by tracking the readership and abandonment rate of each section of the book.
Open Review takes place before and at the same time as the book publisher’s peer review. The feedback from Open Review and peer review will be used to create a revised manuscript. The Open Review period will end when the final manuscript is submitted to the publisher.
The concept of Open Review, as it is implemented here, is taken from Matthew Salganik’s Open Review Toolkit. Much of the text on this page comes from the Open Review Toolkit About page and the Open Review Toolkit Privacy and Consent page
10.1 FAQ about open review
10.1.1 What kind of feedback are you looking for?
Open Review is not just about catching typos. Rather, Open Review is designed to collect all types of feedback, and I’d particularly welcome any feedback that you have about the substance of the book. Are there sections that you find particularly confusing? Are their points that you find particularly important? Am I making claims that you think need to be refined? Are there parts of the book that you think should be removed? When in doubt, I think you should follow one of the main principles at Wikipedia: Be bold.
10.1.2 Can I see the annotations that others are making?
Yes, all the annotations are public. You can see them on right hand side of the each page or you can read them in stream form.
10.1.3 What are the benefits for readers?
You get to read the manuscript and help make it better.
10.1.5 Has anyone ever done something like this before?
10.1.6 What kind of information are you collecting and how will that information be used?
Please read our privacy and consent policy, below.
10.1.7 How I can learn more about traditional peer review of academic books?
The AAUP recently published a report on best practices for peer review.
10.1.8 Can I do this with my book?
Sure. Check out the code for this website at https://github.com/benmarwick/bookdown-ort/ for more about how we did it.
10.1.9 I have a different question about Open Review. How can I get in touch?
Send an email to
10.2 Privacy and Consent Policy
On this website, we are making the complete text of the book available at no cost. While you are reading the book, we are measuring reader behavior in aggregate. For example, we are measuring which sections of the book get read most often. This data will help us improve the book. Everything we are doing is common on modern websites. We describe it in more detail below.
10.2.2 What information do we collect?
10.2.3 How do we use your information?
Any of the information that we collect may be used for research, to improve the book, and to help sell the book.
10.2.4 How do we protect your information?
We implement a variety of security measures to maintain the safety of the information that you provide us.
Most of the browsing information that we have is stored Google Analytics, and you can read more about their security and privacy principles.
10.2.6 Do we disclose any information to outside parties?
We do not sell, trade, or otherwise transfer to outside parties your personally identifiable information except trusted third parties who assist us in operating our website, conducting research, or providing a service to you, so long as those parties agree to keep this information confidential. We may also release your information when we believe release is appropriate to comply with the law, enforce our site policies, or protect ours or others’ rights, property, or safety.
10.2.8 Website hosting
Our website is hosted by Github Pages, and you can read more about Github’s terms of service.
10.2.9 Your consent
If you have any questions, please send us an email
10.2.11 Changes to our Privacy and Consent Policy
Axtell, Robert L., Joshua M. Epstein, Jeffrey S. Dean, George J. Gumerman, Alan C. Swedlund, Jason Harburger, Shubha Chakravarty, Ross Hammond, Jon Parker, and Miles Parker. 2002. “Population Growth and Collapse in a Multiagent Model of the Kayenta Anasazi in Long House Valley.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99 (suppl 3): 7275–9.
Bocinsky, R. Kyle. 2014. “Extrinsic Site Defensibility and Landscape-Based Archaeological Inference: An Example from the Northwest Coast.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 35: 164–76.
Graves McEwan, Dorothy. 2012. “Qualitative Landscape Theories and Archaeological Predictive Modelling—A Journey Through No Man’s Land?” Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 19: 526–47.
Griffin, Arthur F., and Charles Stanish. 2007. “An Agent-Based Model of Prehistoric Settlement Patterns and Political Consolidation in the Lake Titicaca Basin of Peru and Bolivia.” Structure and Dynamics 2 (2): 1–47 [online].
Johnson, C David. 2003. “Mesa Verde Region Towers: A View from Above.” Kiva 68 (4). JSTOR: 323–40.
Kohler, Timothy A., and Sandra C. Parker. 1986. “Predictive Models for Archaeological Resource Location.” Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 9: 397–452.
Kohler, Timothy A., and Mark D. Varien, eds. 2012. Emergence and Collapse of Early Villages: Models of Central Mesa Verde Archaeology. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.
Kowalewski, Stephen A. 2008. “Regional Settlement Pattern Studies.” Journal of Archaeological Research 16: 225–85.
Martindale, Andrew, and Kisha Supernant. 2009. “Quantifying the Defensiveness of Defended Sites on the Northwest Coast of North America.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 28 (2): 191–204.
Maschner, Herbert D.G., and Jeffrey W. Stein. 1995. “Multivariate Approaches to Site Location on the Northwest Coast of North America.” Antiquity 69 (262): 61–73.
Sakaguchi, Takashi, Jesse Morin, and Ryan Dickie. 2010. “Defensibility of Large Prehistoric Sites in the Mid-Fraser region on the Canadian Plateau.” Journal of Archaeological Science 37 (6): 1171–85.
Van Dyke, Ruth M., R. Kyle Bocinsky, Tucker Robinson, and Thomas C. Windes. 2016. “Great Houses, Shrines, and High Places: Intervisibility in the Chacoan World.” American Antiquity 81 (2): 205–30.