On the positive side, posting papers on academic sites results in more citations than just publishing on paper.
On the negative side, certainly the Web has speeded up the job of the plagiarist. Plagiarists no longer have to suffer the hazardous consequences of inhaling the thick dust from dusty archives. The average undergraduate plagiarist now uses Google more that Google Scholar to find text to plagiarise. But the wise lecturer checks with both search engines. Our warstories tell of superiors, lecturers, and students who have plagiarised our own work! Of great concern too is the sheer boldfaced copyright infringement that is taking place.
On the positive side, posting papers on academic sites results in more citations than just publishing on paper.
On the negative side, certainly the Web has speeded up the job of the plagiarist. Plagiarists no longer have to suffer the hazardous consequences of inhaling the thick dust from dusty archives. The average undergraduate plagiarist now uses Google more that Google Scholar to find text to plagiarise. But the wise lecturer checks with both search engines. Our warstories tell of superiors, lecturers, and students who have plagiarised our own work! Of great concern too is the sheer boldfaced copyright infringement that is taking place.
Yes, we added a pre-print for a paper on the RG. At that time the paper was under the review process in a conference. Later when the paper is accepted, we get also a letter from the editor telling us that the plagiarism level of the paper is not accepted as it reached 35% and he will reject it. We told him that the plagiarism software that they use is inaccurate because it should display 100% plagiarism. We then explained to him that we used the 'pre-print' facility provided by the RG, and sent him a link to the pre-print. They checked again and found that the vast majority of the found plagiarism was not a true plagiarism as the software was pointing at our pre-print.The problem was solved peacefully :)
What Mohamed just said is a bit confusing to me but it adds to the fact that these sites have operating problems which are troubling us researchers and are knocking down our publications .
The moral of Mohamed's story is that anti-plagiarism software is far from perfect, and may falsely accuse some writers of plagiarism.
Interesting point of view!
I will follow the discussion with care.
RG asks me on daily basis to post the full text of a paper that is still in print. I take care not to, before it is legally released..
Yes, Ian Kennedy is right.anti-plagiarism software is far from perfect. The main defines we get is to add several quoting references per every idea that we post on an article.
This is very good discussion of the effect plagiarisme or anti-plagiarism.
RG exemple: you have more papiers as read, but not citer --- and later some of paper appears with plagiat of you work...
So, you publication is interest ...
and we bury scientists ungrateful from of the notebook of contacts!
Hi all,
Highly important topic.
Like Dr Maria Bettencourt Pires
I also wonder, why RG keeps pushing us to upload unpublished work on daily basis?
Nice discussion. So, we always have both positive and negative side of using softwares.
I think it is best to only upload or post finished and published works that can be correctly cited. Not all software and even some researcher understand the meaning of pre-print, paper in press, accepted etc.
The conclusion of my story is perfectly described by Ian. The plagiarism softwares to be really effective, they should either carefully inspected by humans, or designed to include high level AI tools to decriminate various types of plagiarism as well as falsely classified plagiarism. They should also able to detect plagiarized images and illustrations. As Mr. Ian indicates, these softwares need significant development ti meet their desired objectives.
Dear Marko Pecina,
Please tell us why you are against uploading pre-prints in their unpublished form.
Recently, a new peer review model is created. It is called the 'open review' model. In one of its forms, an article is published after a fast review by editors, then it is uploaded to the publisher's online system to receive global review comments and discussions. Therefore, a forum is created for each article. What do you think about that model?
I think that since recently - too much attention is paid to plagiarism.
If plagiarists steel your idea - that's one thing - and it should be traced and punished.
As to the textual plagiarism - [of course if it does not go page after page] - very often it appears not intentionally.
On many occasions. Let me put a few here in order to help others:
1) I placed my paper on Dickens and Jung, now on RG, with a journal that refused to accept it because of alleged plagiarism on my part detailing passages they had thus identified. I pointed out the paper had been on a number of sites for approximately 4 years and the papers/in one case a powerpoint, had plagiarised me not the other way around.
2) At least five of my papers, all that were on academia edu, placed on a) sites where essays are offered for sale b) being sold as books on internet without my permission c) posted with my name omitted and other names there.
Also: the same thing has occurred to stories of mine placed on internet journals and magazines.
Leonid V Vladimirov,
You mentioned a critical issue; 'stolen ideas'. How would you prove that your idea has been stolen if it is not published?
I guess that stealing of ideas in a new dimension of ethics that should be seriously considered. Probably, uploading of pre-prints is an approach to face such problem; any other ideas?
I refused to understand why someone should be posting unpublished work. RG just wanted to populate its database with papers and so you shouldn't necessarily dance to their tune. Upload only published papers- my advice
One may post pre-print paper which has no potential for publication anywhere. I mean if you will not try to publish that paper you may post it as pre-print. I don't recommend to send papers having publication potential.
Ok then, I will admit one thing. We all join academic sites because we want to be part of a community of practice. But we are not really part of anything, if there is no practice here. I can always post my work on ssrn which is the social sciences research network where economics belong at and keep it strictly professional and academic and communicate through email or not communicate at all. The reason I joined RG or Academia is because I am looking for some feedback. I know that academia is a competitiveness driven market, where we all join in order to. .... fulfill a purpose. If someone steals from me today, then I will eventually stop sharing. Maybe we are going the wrong way, and we need RG to send us a manual.
if anyone reads the guidelines for use of softwares such as Turnitin it is Cleary stated as an indicator of plagiarism and not definitive proof.
Sadly, some people are lazy and will take the software report as conclusive proof of wrong doing which is dangerous.
When something is flagged for concern it should be referred for investigation by a member of staff.
So yes plagiarism is easier for students now days. Ultimately, correct training of people who utilise the software is the problem.
The software is not Judge and Jury but a tool to get too the truth.
I have always been skeptical about uploading the research in their unpublished format
The process must be completed first.The final copy speaks better quality than uploaded unfinished work still undergoing review or just accepted and need the precious attention of copy editors and other necessary departments.
It is also very important to understand the terms of the journal about this!
Dear Dr Abiodun,
Greetings,
Personally, I strongly believe RG is a great place for scientists to present their work and bring them to the attention of interested public. Not only that, we can ask our questions, participate in scientific discussions and help others with their technical questions and expand our global networking as well. What we try to understand is why we are asked to put unpublished material (most often results of several months or years hard work in the form of text, data, etc.) on public domain?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Citations