IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v83y2010i2d10.1007_s11192-009-0060-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rethinking the size of scientific specialties: correcting Price’s estimate

Author

Listed:
  • K. Brad Wray

    (State University of New York)

Abstract

I aim to advance our understanding of the size of scientific specialties. Derek Price’s groundbreaking work has provided us with valuable conceptual tools and data for making progress on this issue. But, I argue that his estimate of 100 scientists per specialty is flawed. He fails to take into account the fact that the average publishing scientist publishes only 3.5 articles throughout her career. Hence, rather than consisting of 100 scientists, I have suggested that specialties are probably somewhat larger, perhaps somewhere between 250 and 600 scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • K. Brad Wray, 2010. "Rethinking the size of scientific specialties: correcting Price’s estimate," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 83(2), pages 471-476, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:83:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0060-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-009-0060-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-009-0060-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-009-0060-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Edwin Horlings & Thomas Gurney, 2013. "Search strategies along the academic lifecycle," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(3), pages 1137-1160, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:83:y:2010:i:2:d:10.1007_s11192-009-0060-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.