We examine the assumptions and data base used by researchers who have tested the Ortega hypothesis. We find that the assumptions are not supported by the data and that the data are faulty. We conclude that the results are artifactual. We recommend that any policy implemented on the basis of this research be suspended.
KeywordsData Base Ortega Hypothesis
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.J. COLE, S. COLE, The Ortega hypothesis,Science, 178 (1972) 368.Google Scholar
- 2.G. S. GREEN, A test of the Ortega hypothesis in criminology,Criminology, 19 (1981) 45.Google Scholar
- 4.W. E. SNIZEK, A Re-examination of the Ortega hypothesis: The Dutch case,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 3.Google Scholar
- 5.S. COLE, G. S. MEYER, Little Science, Big Science revisited,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 443.Google Scholar
- 6.M. H. MACROBERTS, B. R. MACROBERTS, Quantitative measures of communication in Science: A study of the formal level,Social Studies of Science, 16 (1986) 151.Google Scholar
- 8.D. EDGE, Quantitative measures of communication in science. A critical Review,History of Science, 17 (1979) 102.Google Scholar
- 9.G. N. GILBERT, Referencing as persuasion,Social Studies of Science, 7 (1977) 113.Google Scholar
- 10.T. A. BROOKS, Private acts and public objects: An investigation of citer motivations,Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 36 (1985) 223.Google Scholar
- 12.J. D. MCGERVEY, Citation analysis,Science, 183 (1974) 28.Google Scholar
- 13.N. WADE, Citation analysis: A new tool for Science administrators,Science, 188 (1975) 429.Google Scholar
- 14.A. J. LOTKA, The frequency distribution of scientific productivity,Journal of the Washington Academy of Science, 16 (1926) 317.Google Scholar