Jointly published by AkadØmiai Kiad, Budapest Scientometrics, and Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht Vol. 61, No. 3 (2004) 301321 Received April 19, 2004 Address for correspondence: ANTONIO FERN`NDEZ-CANO Dpt. MØtodos de Investigacin en Educacin, Facultad de Educacin Universidad de Granada, Campus de Cartuja, Granada, 18071, Spain E-mail: afcano@ugr.es 01389130/2004/US $ 20.00 Copyright ' 2004 AkadØmiai Kiad, Budapest All rights reserved Reconsidering Prices model of scientific growth: An overview ANTONIO FERN`NDEZ-CANO, a MANUEL TORRALBO, b MNICA VALLEJO a a Facultad de Ciencias de la Educacin, Universidad de Granada (Spain) b Departamento de MatemÆtica, Universidad de Crdoba (Spain) This paper presents an overview of the general model of scientific growth proposed by D. J. de Solla Price. Firstly, the formulation of the model is examined using the seminal sources. Later, forerunners, offshoots and criticisms to the model are discussed. Finally, an integrative review using retrieved empirical studies exposes the complexity and diversity of models of scientific growth and the absence of consistent patterns. Formulation of the model Measuring the size of the science was, from early on, a problematical task when this sort of mathematical Science of Science 1 came into being in the 1920s and 1930s. Clearly, the chief difficulty of this undertaking lay in devising some means of measuring scientific effort or outputs based on a consistent metrological theory. In fact, the construct formulated under the general term size of science encompassed multiple operative definitions or variables. Price 2 acknowledged such conceptual and operational difficulties when he said: Both considerations concern what one might well call the size of science [italics in the original]  the magnitude of the effort in terms of numbers of men working, papers written, discoveries made, financial outlay involved. (p. 163) In an effort to examine the highly cumulative nature of science, an arithmetic process was developed by pioneer scholars. Derek John de Solla Price, the first great precursor to do this, had the ability to summarize important generalizations about science into simple quantitative patterns. Undoubtedly, he represents a giant with big shoulders where we, the common people, seek support. Price, a foremost intellectual leader, offered us a paradigm for the study of science overall and its various disciplines or sciences in particular. In spite of historical-qualitative approaches to the study of