A bibliometric system which really works
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
A simple empirical method for predicting library circulations
Journal of Documentation
On the growth of bibliographies with time: an exercise in bibliometric prediction
Journal of Documentation
Information Processing and Management: an International Journal - Special issue on Informetrics
Fractional counts for authorship attribution: a numerical study
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Dynamic behavior of Bradford's law
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Informetric distributions. III. ambiguity and randomness
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Bradford's distribution: from the classical bibliometric “law” to the more general stochastic models
Journal of the American Society for Information Science - Special topic issue on the history of documentation and information science: part II
Methods for accrediting publications to authors or countries: consequences for evaluation studies
Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Implications of ambiguity for scientometric measurement
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology - Special issue on the still the frontier: Information Science at the Millenium
Extending Lotkaian informetrics
Information Processing and Management: an International Journal
Hi-index | 0.00 |
Abe Bookstein has long been a persuasive advocate of the central role of the classical Lotka-Bradford-Zipf laws in bibliometrics and, subsequently, scientometrics and informetrics. In a series of often-quoted papers (Bookstein, [1977], [1990a], [1990b], [1997]), he has sought to demonstrate that Lotka-type laws have a unique resilience to various forms of reporting, which leads inevitably and naturally to their observance in empirical informetric data collected under a wide variety of circumstances. A general statement of his position was featured in the recent JASIST Special Topic Issue on Information Science at the Millennium (Bookstein, [2001]). We shall argue that there are grounds to dispute some of the logic, the mathematics, and the reality of the development. The contention is on the one hand that Bookstein's development lacks a rigorous mathematical basis, and on the other, that, in general, informetric processes are adequately described within a standard probabilistic framework with stochastic modelling offering the more productive approach.