The false ‘Ortega Hypothesis’: a literature science case study

Abstract

The well-known anti-elitist ‘Ortega Hypothesis’ published just over 30 years ago in Science was constructed and named by two science sociologists, and refuted by themselves on the basis of a quantitative author ‘citation analysis’ investigation carried out in the physics literature. Textual evidence presented here proves that the construction of this so-called ‘Ortega Hypothesis’ with its anti-elitist meaning was based on falsification of the quoted text and misinterpretation of the doctrine of the eminent elitist Spanish philosopher. This anti-elitist, and hence anti-Ortega, false hypothesis spread very widely in the scientific literature as the ‘Ortega Hypothesis’. The literatures of numerous disciplines have so far accepted this falsely constructed hypothesis: the fact of the falsity of the ‘Ortega Hypothesis’ has not even arisen in the debates about it and under its name. Analysis of the literature case of the false ‘Ortega Hypothesis’ has also thrown light on the current depressing state of referencing practice in the scientific literature. Scientific communications of doubtful and even false content have continued to appear and their world-wide dissemination has accelerated. For this reason, correction work in science is more important than ever.

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 — 13 citations exist upstream.

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