Sometimes it is difficult to publish only original results once in a journal. When a scientist wants to speak about results at the conference, put research results into a proceedings, part of the results published doctoral student at doctoral conference, sometimes it is necessary to give some results to local magazine or to the university scientific Proceedings. Publish only once without any duplicity can not. In some variations it may be. But it may not be exactly the same, the same format, the same documentation. That `s my opinion.

Dear @Rajesh, it was hard to avoid duplication of scientific research work in past time, before the existence of social research networks. 

Today, there is technology developed for that purpose. Researchers may use Scopus.

Scopus makes it easier to identify potential partners and key influencers in your area of interest. Fast and effective search enables and help you to overcome such problems, like duplication.

https://blog.scopus.com/posts/how-researchers-at-rd-organizations-use-scopus-to-overcome-challenges?utm_campaign=Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017&utm_campaignPK=324179751&utm_term=OP32335&utm_content=326421649&utm_source=71&BID=972561579&utm_medium=email&SIS_ID=0&dgcid=Newsletters%20%26%20Alerts_email_Scopus%20Newsletter%20End%20users%202017

I do agree with Lubomir that with social network and online publication, it is much easier to avoid duplication of the research work and also publication of already publish findings.

in addition to mentioned answers sometime duplications confirm results.!!

Now for cross verification of duplication, good software are available. Please list the best software to avoid piracy. 

Here is a good article related to the present question:

http://3dsbiovia.com/blog/index.php/2014/03/04/experiment-duplication-unnecessary-waste-resources/

Dear Tabata, I agree with suggestion and explanation given in the attached article. More focus "The best way to combat duplication within the laboratory environment is to have open communication between labs so that researchers know what experiments are going on around them. One of the best practices for research labs is to implement an Electronic Lab Notebook (ELN)". 

To prevent duplication and plagiarism in scientific publishing, various detecting tools have been widely applied, such as CrossCheck, Turnitin, I-thenticate, and many other freely available plagiarism detection softwares.

In recent years, many journals have provided their explicit policies on this issue. For example, on Elsevier’s website there are detailed instructions entitled “For Editors: Questions and Answers on Policies” (http://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/questions-and-answers), and also on our own journals’ website (http://www.zju.edu.cn), there is “Instruction for Authors” that clearly states that we use “CrossCheck to fight against plagiarism and to ensure high ethical standards for all of the submitted papers”.

Thanks Dr. Nisha, Useful information on some software available. I have used Turnitin at IIT Delhi. Please share if any software available open access.

Hi! One obvious way to prevent too much duplication is to evaluate the stream of publications that sometimes comes from one and the same researcher, who is only reformulating the same stuff but under other title and with some other disposition - but the same data and the same theory. This is very confusing, and researchers probably do it to appear productive, although they only confuse readers of research. Frequently they cite between their own papers as well. This could easily be avoided, since it comes from one and the same author. There is however often more formal appreciation when valuing merits to have written many articles, than the content being unique. Some authors ought to write fewer but better papers, that is my contribution to this question.

I agree with Anders Norberg about an author try to publish so many papers on certain research area but with different angles and the major conclusion is the same. However, the major point is that the results or findings should not be the same in articles. 

It is the fact rather unfortunate that duplication practice has become the nuisance for the writers of various categories including also a scientific research which even after finding the such skill of coping person ,writers involved from such unhealthy character of individual have in quite good cases become being a observer .

For carrying out to activities of copying in any areas ,the person involving in such activities are also the person of science may be during certain part of the activities but due to the limitation ,lacking in his purpose & in order to focus his activities such writers take there sort of undue activities .

There are the person who have meet them a jealousy ,a source of envy temperament , such person in order to satisfy his glory is to take the unhealthy action for satisfying his purpose at least for scientific research scientist should be careful & should keep his eyes open so as to avoid such sort of mischief in his program however if the researcher finds out such sort of mischief  it is desirable that he should use his right of copy right thru the judicial court by imposing the penalty of quite good amount so as to avoid such unhealthy action in the areas of duplication .

This is my personal opinion  

Dear Rohit, You know some consultant are available and writing scientific funding proposal for different organisation and scientist/ academician. I am fully agree with you that Scientist must careful. Some time same proposal with different name.

Необходимо соблюдать требование к новизне исследования.

Путь к новизне предполагает 1) Тщательный обзор всей научной литературы по тематике- объекту исследования; 2) Демаркация познанной и непознанной части объекта; 3)Формулировка идеи поиска; 4) Обозначение предметной части объекта исследования .

Dear Mukin and Research Gate, I am unable to read the language, so please help me convert it in English

You must comply with the requirement of novelty.

The path to the novelty involves 1) a Thorough review of all scientific literature on the subject - the object of study; 2) the Demarcation of known and unknown parts of the object; 3)formulation of the idea of the search; 4) Designation of the subject part of the object of study .

The work of investment & Development have a special suggestions about duplication of research. In this case, human resource, have one condition :

a) The group of application is not same in his condition (Age, Country, Occupation)

b) The studies conclusions are not same. Maybe the variance of data base have opportunities for other indicators that confiability, perspective or implications of procedures.

In recently studies of Dominican Republic have ideas about contradiction in the same answers, but this condition have possibilities for others investigators and verify interpretative variables.

Dear Russo, Agree with that validation of Scientific Research in different scenario is require but scientist called it Innovation.

 Your suggestion requested on research or Innovation - in this question.

Mr. Kumar i understand  your appreciation about innovation, but in this scenario the investigation have methodologies for implementation is not innovation.

Innovation is opcional  for results or  new implementations thats virtuals surveys or methodologies in observatories (example Delphi with experts in  countries with different ideologies or generationals investigators)  

I desire your innovation explain the problem with a new vision in the perspective of the science.  

Duplicate submission is a very serious ethical issue when we speak about the same authors. COPE has many cases about such fraud.

Here is one case: Whose responsibility is duplicate submission?

http://publicationethics.org/case/whose-responsibility-duplicate-submission

Replication is reasonable if it is needed to verify prior results, investigate results that failed to be significant, or relate problem to specific site (study setting)