I have datasets I am using to write two or three papers per set. A paper has been published from each of the datasets and the other papers are in progress. I am reusing the data in different ways. Am I bound by any ethics to acknowledge the first paper in the subsequent papers? And how do I make such acknowledgement if it is essential
My feeling is that if you are using the raw data in subsequent papers you need to present the raw data showing how you are analyzing it. With the raw data you will not need to reference the earlier papers.
However, it may be indicated. as you write, that you refer to the earlier papers (usually for issues of brevity), then you need to reference them.
Ethically, yes.
How to make acknowledgement is the same as acknowledging anything used which comes from somebody besides the writer (say, yourself). This can be done by:
1. normal reference in reference list correlating with an in-text citation (eg
Doyle, H. (2014a) ~
Doyle, H. (2014b) ~ )
2. a note or footnote at the start or end of the text - eg. ' ~ (aspects) using the same data set are reported in Doyle (2014a, 2014b)' or ''~ (aspects) using the same data set are reported elsewhere (Doyle 2014a, 2014b)'
3. telling explicitly in the text, preferably early on - eg. '... . Conclusions drawn from data reported in this paper are also reported in Doyle (2014a, 2014b)' or '... . Findings based on data reported in this paper are also discussed in Doyle (2014a, 2014b)'
You can also of course use a combination of these.
It is more than a style issue. The central issue is to be open and upfront about your work. If the data and your work are done properly, then there should not be any problems. If there are problems, at least you are going to find out about it. As well of course you as reader of someone else's work can respond in the same way.
A proper journal or publisher would have a citation style or protocol in place, and you should be able to check with them. In fact this is one way to judge the value of an academic publication. American Psychologists Association (APA) citation style is fairly common in humanities, especially in the US and comes from a regularly updated book which is almost 1.5 cm thick (also online at http://www.apastyle.org/manual/). Lots of university libraries, etc. have guides as well. I have used the Purdue Owl (https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/10/) for myself and for students extensively, partly as it deals with writing style and not just citation style. The Purdue Owl deals with APA style and MLA. There are also Chicago style (which I prefer) and Oxford.
Further it depends also on your discipline field: in science, reports often have multiple (maybe up to 15 authors) and have common specialised styles for citing multiple works in relatively short reports. Humanities and social sciences tend to have fewer joint authors and frequent single authors, and the citation styles generally follow such requirements
So, two points: yes, you should cite work using the same data set if you can. And you do it in the same way that you would cite any other work. You are not citing yourself; you are citing a separate publication.
I feel that if you perform different analysis on the original data, it may not be necessary to reference the previous publication. If you are extending or expanding on the original analysis, then do reference the previous publication.
''... I am reusing the data in different ways.....'' is the key there. No plagiarism is involved in your using same database in different forms. You need not reference previous publications that took different direction or focus.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers