Plagiarism is considered a cardinal sin among many academics but I agree that sometimes this may be unintentional and due to a lack of experience-so should they have a second chance? See the other discussion thread on this subject in RG.

Part of the responsibility lies with the past instructors and advisors of these inexperienced researchers. It is one of the most important rules that you don't use the same words as are found in another paper, without quotation marks and attribution.

It is not unusual that my literature reviews cover the same ground in subsequent papers. But I always write these sections with new wording, not copying and pasting. Future researchers need to learn this from their teachers and advisors during their educational years.

Editors of legitimate journals often feel that they need to be strict, because they already get so many more submissions than they can possibly print.

I've seen cases where the similarity test is failed due to the high number of direct quotations used and authors paraphrasing their own prior work, as well. In cases like these, I would recommend taking another look (beyond the numbers alone) to see why the similarity index is high before rejecting the paper.

If you read the terms and conditions of peer reviewed journals, you will notice that only in case of major/ minor corrections, you can get a second chance to revise and resubmit the paper. A high similarity index causes a direct rejection as the editor of journal expect that you have paraphrased and proofreaded the paper before submitting it to the journal. It is not a journal mistake, but the author mistake since you have to read all the conditions and information provided by the journal before publishing in it.

the pligarism programmes are unfair

for example i thencicate

blindly it gives pligarism for each word and fixed facts like HCV is a hepatotropic virus and so on

it should judge the novalety of the idea

Generally high similarity index is reported because the author did not pay much attention to the importance of plagiarized content. Either intentionally or unintentionally. Young authors have to keep in mind that a good research is not about original data collection, but reporting research. Due to excitement of getting published, young researchers generally focus on few aspects of the research to make it original. Written content is considered to be of least importance as it seems to be similar across articles. One must set higher standards for themselves when getting a research published. This requires constant efforts to look at all aspects of a research paper for their originality. From the first word till the last word, a research has to be original. One must enjoy the process of publication.

I don't think plagiarized content should be given another opportunity. Even if a new idea is being presented, the literature is required to be referred independent of all other articles published on the related content so far. No new idea can be introduced without careful reading of the previous literature. How is it possible even that someone is writing about a new concept with copied content? So no plagiarism plz...