Supplementary Materials:
The following are available online at
http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/7/2/22/s1
,
Table S1: MonthlyData, Table S2: QuarterlyData.
Funding:
This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest:
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Appendix A.
Appendix A.1. Antiquities Looting Data Collection and Coding Strategy
Data on antiquities looting were compiled from news stories downloaded from Reuters and Lexis
Nexis. The data from both sources were available starting in the 1980s. To ensure that no stories
were left out, data were pulled from Reuters and Lexis Nexis for as many years as were available
(1980–2012 and 1987–2014, respectively). Only data from 1997–2014 were ultimately kept for the
analysis. The Reuters data included 180,349 stories downloaded using only the key term “Egypt” and
the Lexis Nexis data included 1138 stories downloaded using a complex search string. The data from
Reuters had already been downloaded in batches of 100 and each batch was searched individually for
key terms relating to antiquities looting. By contrast, the Lexis Nexis data were downloaded for this
analysis to ensure the most current news stories were included and so a complex search string of key
terms could be used, which accounts for the difference in the initial number of results returned.
Table
A1
shows the key words searched for both Reuters and Lexis Nexis and the number of
results returned for each. All coding of the news stories was done by hand. All lead sentences were
reviewed to remove stories not relating to antiquities looting in Egypt or that were published prior to
1987. There were 20 cases where information was available for the year but not the month. These cases
were coded as taking place in June, since it was the middle of the year.
Those lead sentences that were unclear, were marked as “unsure” and kept for further
investigation. The remaining 732 stories were coded based on the entire news story according to the
following variables:
•
Id
•
Publication date
•
File source
•
Year
•
Quarter
•
Month
•
Day
•
Summary of the incident (brief one to two sentence description of the incident)
•
Location (a description of the incident location)
•
Location type (archaeological site, museum, other, or no information provided)
•
Location type text (only if location type was “other”)
•
Incident type (destruction, looting, or theft)
For any case that was marked unsure, or more information was needed, additional research was
conducted to corroborate and supplement the information in the story. This research involved tracing
sources referenced in the story or by searching for additional news stories not captured by Reuters or
Lexis Nexis that had more detailed information on the case in question. Supplemental sources were
recorded along with the original source.
Arts 2018, 7, 22
22 of 26
Dostları ilə paylaş: |