No abstract

The phenomenon of non-indexed eponymal cited ness (NIEC) in physics literature was one of the method ological questions debated in the so-called and well-known Ortega Hypothesis case in Science, but it remained unsolved for lack of factual research data. According to the results of this first fact-finding examination, the NIEC phenomenon is a very frequent and long-standing feature in the journal literature of physics, with permanent and growing impor tance in respect of both the number of scientists in question and the number of all eponymal citations not indexed by Science Citation Index ( SCI) . The nature and phenomenology of non-indexed eponymal citedness is given in brief. The emergence of the phenomenon of NIEC marks the end of the first stage of the Merton 'obliteration by incorporation' (OBI) as a process. From the viewpoint of indexed-formal cited ness, the literature phenomenon of NIEC is a special case of Garfield's 'uncitedness'. The neglect of eponymal citedness of the most eminent scientists and the omission of the view point of historical temporality in the analysis of citation data are the most serious methodological faults committed in the indexed author 'citation analyses' which evaluate scientists. The results of this first examination of the NIEC phenomenon of scientific literature constitute a new argument against the use of bibliographic data of citation indexes for the evaluation of scientists as scientists and/or for other similar non-bibliographic purposes.

The `Author's Effect of Showcasing' (AES) is the activity of publishing authors who shape by free will the formal reference stock of their communications cited directly and item by item, placing this formal reference stock into the showcase of science — consciously or unconsciously. This first paper of the study demonstrates the emergence, causes and traces of the AES phenomenon in the journal literature of the natural sciences already in the mature Little Science age, and the continuous existence of the phenomenon ever since. The perception and cognition of the effect is shown on the basis of the relevant findings of the present author's previous, manual fact-finding reference investigations based on autopsy, processing around 27,600 journal communications and reference stocks containing more than 322,000 citations. Finally, a summarizing definition of the notion of the effect is given. In a second paper, the manifestation of the AES phenomenon will be demonstrated and analysed in the theoretically most homogeneous domain of the scientific literature.

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.

-211) the nature, life course, and importance of this phenomenon of scientific literature was demonstrated. It was shown that the quantity of nonindexed indirect-collective references in The Physical Review now alone exceeds many times over the quantity of formal references listed in the Science Citation Index as "citations." It was shown that the ICR phenomenon is present in all the 44 elite physics journals of a representative sample of this literature. The bibliometrically very heterogeneous sample is very homogeneous regarding the presence and frequency of the ICR phenomenon. However, no real connection could be found between the simple degree of documentedness and the presence and frequency of the ICR phenomenon on the journal level of the sample. The present article reports the findings of the latest ICR investigation carried out on the level of communications of the representative sample. Correlation calculations were carried out in the stock of all 458 communications containing the ICR phenomenon as a statistical population, and within this population also in the groups of communications of the "normal" and the "letter" journals, and the "short communications." The correlation analysis did not find notable statistical correlation between the simple and specific degree of documentedness of a communication and the number of works cited in it by ICR act(s) either in the total population or in the selected groups. There is no correlation either statistical or real (i.e., cause-and-effect) between the documentedness of scientific communications made by their authors and the presence and intensity of the ICR method used by their authors. However, in reality there exists a very strong connection between these two statistically independent variables: both depend on the referencing author, on his/her subjectivity and barely limited subjective free will. This subjective free will shapes the stock of the formal-direct references of scientific communications, thereby placing the achievements cited in this way and their creators into the (indexed) showcase of present Big Science. The same free will decides on the use or nonuse of the ICR method, and in the case of use also on the intensity with which the method is used.