I have seen people answering here on Research Gate which is copied from different websites. Is it a good practice to copy/paste without mentioning or crediting the source?
It is a platform where people are well educated, nevertheless, such an activity is observed.
If its helpful why not.. but if you copy the link its become better to see the source
If they read it they can get some knowledge.. simply by pasting they loose everything..
If the content is relevant, it can be excerpted and posted as answer to the question along with the thread.
I agree with ,Harry,,, yes , as long as you you understand what you read and think it's relevant to the question asked.
In addition to the insightful responses of the colleagues, from the point of time-saving, yes, it is a good practice.
Regards
Only after quoting by using proper "..." and italics inside, while the source is clearly shown!
Cut And Paste (CAP) practice without referencing the online source is plagiarism. However, CAP practice with forwarding citation is helpful and no harm to answer.
Regards,
Jahangir
On the one hand, it is much better to give the source, but on the other hand, the site owner can remove interesting content from it, limit access to it, not pay the domain, die ... In such situations, the duplication of content can be very useful.
A separate category is content protected by copyright, which for various reasons is difficult to access via a legal path. There are books that were published a long time ago. Today, they are practically impossible to buy. Also, libraries often do not have them. Sometimes they appear in various websites, and are then removed at the request of the publishing house. On the one hand, I understand the protection of copyrights and the interests of publishing houses, but on the other hand, it's hard for me to condemn someone who reaches for legally questionable copies of materials for which legal access is not possible.
My first job was to make photocopies. The company where I worked was located at one of the universities. Most of its clients were students who commissioned copying of whole books. In those days, people in Poland earned between $ 200-300, and awareness of something like intellectual property only reached us. My generation was really stealing knowledge. And there are still countries in the world where to buy a scientific book you have to work for a month and not eat.
I know that in my answer I went a bit beyond the scope of the question, but the issue of the relationship of limitations in access to knowledge and protection of the interests of those who create this knowledge seems to me so important that I could not ignore it.
However, it is absolutely wrong to assign someone else's content without indicating the author and source. I believe that you can not just copy someone else's content and sign it with your name.
It is not at all a healthy practice for any areas of professional line or even in areas of academic profession also .
Any individual whether he may get a success or otherwise should come out with his original practice & it is equally true that with the passage of time & regular practices he may certainly come out in the line with original identity .
This is personal opinion
The purpose of the question is not the test or the examination of the colleague, but is a public dialogue to convey your idea and the ideas of others and the exchange of knowledge. But the important thing remains scientific honesty when the transfer of an answer from a particular site, should be installed site transferred from it.
In a RG it's a bad practice, in other websites it depends.
RG is a platform of researcher where we can copy/paste but we have to mention from where are we citing.
Research practice is to read, to answer and to cite .....
No problem doing that. It becomes unethical if the source of the information is not acknowledged (cited).
there is no problem when a researcher copy something from the web and paste but the researcher is suppose to rewrite in his/her own words and acknowledge the source.
Anyone can search on google. If someone asks a question, he expects a short and clear answer from an expert. If you made copy pasted, mmmm then where is your experience, your knowledge, the pleasure of shared, to be useful for others.
Those who have mentioned that just copying and pasting without acknowledgement are plagiarizing and this should count against them by RG. If a proper citation is given, it can be useful as several have pointed out to not have to re-invent an answer, but it seems to me that a poster should always provide a comment that ADDS to the value of what they are pasting. And yes, many of the 'answers' given on RG can be found with a simple web search and it does appear that many 'students' are looking for an easy way to write their papers.
if relevant why not? Playing Hypocrisy i is really bad!; giving answers you got from another link, presenting you as an expert is not honest!
why the repetition when the information is accessible in a web page not restrictive, but must be acknowledged!
most people do not come here to spend bulk of their time in a day on research gate!
I agree with many answers however, a student requires to research the topic, cite the website and author for work to stand against fellow students work. RG can be useful in asking questions but the student need to understand the topic to ask specific questions and the applicable ones to derive the expected answer which can be text book ideal and the real world applicability.
I think you may take an answer from the web, but you should make the necessary citation. Honesty is a prime virtue of scientific research.
I would agree with this question, if the asking people would cite the most valuable answers. However, the citation: “private communication” does not apply for a long time, as well as the citation: “answer on RG” I have not seen. In most cases, the answers to questions are located in ordinary textbooks (which also often do not use citation) and questioners could easily find these answers themselves. However, for some reason it is easier for them to ask a question on RG, than to formulate a request in Google or other search engine. As for important questions, answers to which are not easy to find, then the person who answers the question often does not give a complete answer, he sometimes refers to an existing work. In this case, the quotation is appropriate. Nevertheless, if you remember the pre-Internet era (when I was young), and when I asked my questions, I often received such answers: "Look at ... works, he wrote something about this issue ..." After that, I began to look through the works of mentioned classic. In this case, the making of the correct citation was my personal task, not of the respondent. As regards answers to questions, which cannot be publish (as since this is a personal experience that does not have much scientific value), it is just my gift to the questioner. I once received them too.
Finally, the answer to this question is that some people want to receive not only a meaningful answer on RG, but also a fully formalized one (ready to use). Can they do anything for themselves?
The scientific work consists of two important parts: to study something new, and to figure out whether this is really new. Science did not begin in 2016, and not even in 2000, when the boss published his first article.
Dear Dr. Zeeshan,
I agree with you because I noticed some don't put source which is unhealthy. To me, attaching sources to it even makes the answer more meaning and useful.
Posting with sources attached is ok. Also, quite different from publishing for one to claim ownership.
In my defense I write because I am used to explaining !!!
I write because I studied and taught ...
For better understanding I share links . Will I copy content - NOPE ...
I am ok helping with homework (annoyed at times) any way it is for young students so never mind ...
Mr. Abderrahmane Khechekhouche,
Thank you for your comment. I am glad that you and few others have answered this. Actually, every one can google and can find at least a bit (if not all) related to the topic. On the other hand yes it might be true that some students are coming to RG, asking questions to have some help in their class project or so. However, when I see copy and paste of the answers I literally don't understand if someone does not have expertise in the relevant area then why bothering to answer? To get high RG score?
Mr. Isam Issa Omran
Thank you for your time. I appreciate your comment as you have explained it very well. If copy and paste (from google) is what experts have to do then I see no use of such a platform.
For instance, it is always helpful when you don't find any article (most of the times you cannot access due to paid journal articles) but someone, an expert or who has access simply share the knowledge which they acquired from reading of those articles. For instance, if we take the example of Pakistan. Most Universities does not have access to the journal articles due to which research is being effected in a negative way.
If you cannot access to the latest research because your University does not support paying to the journals so students off course cannot afford themselves. What happens in the end poor research papers are written without gap identification and instead of moving forward in developing countries the research is simply stuck since gaps are identified from the studies done back in 1990s because those articles are freely available online.
Dr. Artur Braun
With due respect, I partially agree with you.
Because as far as re-invention of another wheel is concerned, I don't think if one should perceive the question this way. Off course I agree with you, that it would be nonsense to re-invent another wheel on RG.
As far as the wrong or right question is concerned I would say let's keep both questions (the one I asked as well as the one you raised) that makes sense.
Wouldn't you agree from my question's point of view, those knowledgeable professionals here on RG when they copy and paste (might be for the purpose of increasing their RG score) is simply nonsense? Because it kills the purpose of asking question in my sense.
Let's take an example, two professors or two scholars discussing a topic in a room or somewhere online, and sharing their insights about the topic. Does this sounds appealing to you? Or would it be appealing to you that they immediately start googling on the topic and share the insights which google provides them?
We all know that there is much stuff which is not authentic (predatory journals) can be read through google search. Why is there any need of peer-reviewed journals if everything can be accepted which is made (online blog posts) available by google?
The vast majority of questions here do not require professional answers. Textbook or wikipedia is enough. Therefore many people write here about student's laziness (Mental laziness, I suggest. This type of laziness is incompatible with the claimed field of activity. Of course, a smart person is always lazy, but not in such degree...).
As for the increase of the RG rating, it is quite enough one phrase: I follow, or I agree ... During the answer to current question, I found out that the system requires at least two characters in answer!!! Wow, so much! "No" will enough and "Yes" more than enough!
As for the journals, I would not absolutize the information published in the peer-reviewed journals. Finally, the author is responsible for the text and no one else.
Not good that this happens, the answer must be scientific, from a previous experience or through a study done by the owner of the answer,
But it is possible to help others who request links to scientific files
Following my previous message and responding to your comment, I note that some colleagues attach great importance to the score of the platform, and seem to wait for it every week, and occupy a clear space in their thinking and their answers. Therefore, I confirm that we are not students waiting for the result of the weekly exam, and that the process of self-assessment and exchange of knowledge is the best in follow-up, not waiting for the score. Knowing that most colleagues of academia and researchers who are supposed to go beyond this issue.
You can duplicate but you must not forget to acknowledge the sources
Answer at RG is not the publication. This is recommendation, made voluntarily, free of charge, and does not impose on the author of the answer any obligations, except his own internal. The questionner, if he use this advice in own text, should draw the сitation properly, since this is his text and his responsibility. If he experiences problems, no one prevents him from contacting the author of useful advice for clarification.
It is very unethical. It is better to paste the link so that one can visit the original source.
Regards
I understand your question as an ethical/plagiarism one. In this sense I absolutely agree with qualify that action as unethical, in fact some of the responses within this approach are people looking for increase their Research Gate scores without add value to the network participants.
I must agree with the pragmatic approach pointed in some answers regarding that is unnecessary to reinvent the wheel
I did recommend the excellent but in opposite direction answer posted by Artur Braun because his answer point to one very recurrent behavior of newcomers:
"The right question is:
Is it ok to bother other people here on RG while you can get the answer directly from a search engine?"
Obliviously, no as a researcher and expert in the particular field if you have experience then and then they should submit the answer to the query asked someone on research gate. Cutting and pasting and merely referred approach to the ideas of others should be avoided while submission of answer to the query. It is plagiarism if the ideas of others not acknowledged properly.
I think it depended on questions and you can added for that .
best regard.
As people have pointed out, it is good idea to provide the most appropriate answer (by cutting and pasting as if it's their own) rather then telling something doesn't make sense.
Some people genuinely want to get an answer for various reason. however, many times, people ask question for the sake of asking - just to increase their RG score. On a similar note, many people answer for the sake of answering - but there is no substance to it. RG rewards with points for asking and answering questions. These sort of people are obsessed with their RG scores. How will you identify them? Just go to their profile page, click reputation and see the numbers? (e.g. RG score vs h-index; % of questions or answers that they have given). You will notice that they will have very low h-index, but very high RG score. That's it!
Some of these individuals, they don't answer genuinely (just an one-liner answers), share their own experience, or give critical suggestions from their own perspectives. Rather, they google and provide answer, without even acknowledging it. Certainly they know that their answer will be upvoted (unfortunately, people do upvote worthless answers too!) and they will keep moving upward in their RG score. That's the plan.
If copying and pasting from a website can help explain a situation better, why not? But it is just prudent to acknowledge the source of information.
My opinion.
Sometimes the person who asks the question does not necessarily have the skills to use the search engine. In such case it may be a help to read the collected links. Or the person may be just lazy - in this case it is not worth to help. What is unethical is to pretend that the ideas you present are yours when they are not.
I think it is okay if the one who answers this question told the source.
May be.
If anyone copies answers and pastes it here on RG, one should always add the source along with their answers so that there is no conflict of interest. It is better to play safe!
Regards,
It is unethical to copy paste from Internet sources even to give an answer, but there is no problem in providing the links. If you are lifting the sentences as such, it should be in quotation marks. Many of the information provided through answers is “common knowledge”, and it has to be handled differently.
In general, facts and information in common use, which can be verified from a number of sources and are likely to be known by many, are regarded as common knowledge. As a thumb rule, information that occurs in five or more sources can be considered as common knowledge. This usually includes facts available from various secondary sources such as textbooks, handbooks, manuals, dictionaries, directories, encyclopaedias, or even websites.
You can use the common knowledge from a source without citation but only after paraphrasing (writing in your own words). Understand that “common knowledge” or “facts” are not subject to copyright, but the words used to express them may come under copyright restrictions, especially, if the wording is original or unique. Therefore, paraphrasing is a must for such sentences. Do not forget that if you are using the result of an investigative work of someone that has not attained the status of common knowledge, even for answering in a public platform like RG, you need to cite the sources too.
- Badges
- Science topic