A TEST OF THE ORTEGA HYPOTHESIS IN CRIMINOLOGY

Abstract

Abstract Following J. Cole and S. Cole (1973), we attempt to ascertain whether important scientific work is dependent upon works of lesser quality for fruition. The “Ortega hypothesis” posits such a dependence, and we test this assertion in criminology. Using some 2700 works published in criminology between 1945 and 1972, we demonstrate that less important works (those with few citations) are rarely utilized by much more important papers (those with the highest citation counts). The Ortega hypothesis is refuted, and most criminological literature contributes nothing or little that is useful to the field. This corroborates the conditions found by the Coles to exist in physics after their test of Ortega. The data we use are from Wolfgang et al. (1978).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 48 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.