Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement of social stratification. A contribution to the dispute on the ORTEGA hypothesis

  • Invited Papers
  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Some discussion papers about the ORTEGA hypothesis were published inScientometrics. One aspect of these discussions was the necessity for the future extension of empirical research to gain a better foundation for the acceptance or refutation of the Ortega hypothesis which states that the research done by average scientists substantially contributes to the advance of science. In this direction an empirical study about the stratification in coauthorship networks is represented in this paper. It was tested whether the extent of stratification decreases with the increasing number of coauthors per paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M.H. MacRoberts, B.R. MacRoberts, Testing the Ortega hypothesis: Facts and artifacts,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 293–296.

    Google Scholar 

  2. M.B. Line, The shoulders of giants, or the backs of mice?Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 297–298.

    Google Scholar 

  3. M.J. Moravcsik, We must ask questions before giving answers,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 299–302.

    Google Scholar 

  4. V.V. Nalimov, Scientists are not acrobats,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 303–304.

    Google Scholar 

  5. L. Leydesdorff,Towards a theory of citation?Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 305–310.

    Google Scholar 

  6. W.E. Snizek, In search of influence: The testing of the Ortega hypothesis,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 311–314.

    Google Scholar 

  7. A.J. Meadows, Ortega hypothesis,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 315–316.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Oromaner,Ortega, obliteration and policy consequences,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 317–320.

    Google Scholar 

  9. S.M. Lawani, The Ortega hypothesis, individual differences, and cumulative advantage,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 321–324.

    Google Scholar 

  10. A.J. Nederhof, A.F.J. van Raan, Citation theory and the Ortega hypothesis,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 325–328.

    Google Scholar 

  11. H. Zuckerman, Citation analysis and the complex problem of intellectual influence,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 329–338.

    Google Scholar 

  12. H. Small, The significance of bibliographic references,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 339–342.

    Google Scholar 

  13. F. Narin, To believe or not to believe,Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 343–344.

    Google Scholar 

  14. S. Cole, J.R. Cole, Testing the Ortega hypothesis: Millestone or millstone?Scientometrics, 12 (1987) 345–354.

    Google Scholar 

  15. G. Green, A test of the Ortega hypothesis in criminology,Criminology, 19 (1981) 45.

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Oromaner, The Ortega hypothesis and influential articles in American Sociology,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. J. Cole, S. Cole, The Ortega hypothesis,Science, 178 (1972) 368.

    Google Scholar 

  18. W.E. Snizek, A re-examination of the Ortega hypothesis: The Dutch case,Scientometrics, 9 (1986) 3–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. H. Kretschmer, R. Müller, A contribution to the dispute on the Ortega hypothesis: Connection between publication rate and stratification of scientists, tested by various methods.Scientometrics, 18 (1990) 43–56.

    Google Scholar 

  20. P.R. Hofstätter,Gruppendynamik, Rowohlt, Hamburg, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  21. H. Kretschmer, Social stratification of authors revealed from the coauthorship network. In:Informetrics 89/90 — Selection of Papers Submitted for the 2nd International Conference on Bibliometrics, Scientometrics and Informetrics, London, Ontario, Canada, July 5–7 1989,L. Egghe, R. Roussaeu, (Eds) Elsevier, Amsterdam, New York, Oxford, Tokyo, 1990, p. 193–200.

    Google Scholar 

  22. E. Noma, An improved method for analyzing square scientometric transaction matrices,Scientometrics, 4 (1982) 297–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. H.-J. Czerwon,Bibliography (1980–1985). Quantized Hall Effect, Scientific Information Centre of the Academy of Sciences of the GDR, Berlin 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  24. A. Schubert, O. Toma,Quantitative Studies of Science. A Selected Bibliography (1980–1984). Department for Scientometrics, Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  25. W. Glänzel,Bibliography (1982–1985). Endoxan. Department for Scientometrics.Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H.-J. Czerwon,Bibliography (1979–1984). Monte-Carlo Simulations in Lattice Field Theories, Scientific Information Centre of the Academy of Sciences of the GDR, Berlin 1987.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Borgsdorfer Str. 5, 0-1406, Hohen Neuendorf, Germany

    Hildrun Kretschmer

Authors
  1. Hildrun Kretschmer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kretschmer, H. Measurement of social stratification. A contribution to the dispute on the ORTEGA hypothesis. Scientometrics 26, 97–113 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016795

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016795

Keywords

Search

Navigation