Self-Plagiarism is defined as a type of plagiarism in which the writer republishes a work in its entirety or reuses portions of a previously written text while authoring a new work. Writers often maintain that because they are the authors, they can use the work again as they wish; they can’t really plagiarize themselves because they are not taking any words or ideas from someone else. But while the discussion continues on whether self-plagiarism is possible, the ethical issue of self-plagiarism is significant, especially because self-plagiarism can infringe upon a publisher’s copyright.

The American Psychological Association (2010) suggests the following regarding reusing one’s own text: “When duplication of one’s own words is more extensive, citation of the duplicated words should be the norm” and “must conform to legal notions of fair use” (pg. 16).

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/92785/file-5414624-pdf/media/ith-selfplagiarism-whitepaper.pdf

Self-Plagiarism is defined as a type of plagiarism in which the writer republishes a work in its entirety or reuses portions of a previously written text while authoring a new work. Writers often maintain that because they are the authors, they can use the work again as they wish; they can’t really plagiarize themselves because they are not taking any words or ideas from someone else. But while the discussion continues on whether self-plagiarism is possible, the ethical issue of self-plagiarism is significant, especially because self-plagiarism can infringe upon a publisher’s copyright.

The American Psychological Association (2010) suggests the following regarding reusing one’s own text: “When duplication of one’s own words is more extensive, citation of the duplicated words should be the norm” and “must conform to legal notions of fair use” (pg. 16).

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/92785/file-5414624-pdf/media/ith-selfplagiarism-whitepaper.pdf

What is your understanding of authors are allowed to use their own work, but it must be cited?  How do you interpret this?  What happens if the paper you want to cite has been accepted by a journal, but it hasn't been published? Thanks.

Thanks @Behrouz, I have downloaded that paper recently.  It also says:

'Authors can quote from portions of other works with proper citations, but large portions of text, even quoted and cited can infringe on copyright and would not fall under copyright exceptions or “fair use” guidelines. The amount of text one can borrow under “fair use” is not specified, but the Chicago Manual of Style (2010) gives as a “rule of thumb, one should never quote more than a few contiguous paragraphs or stanzas at a time or let the quotations, even scattered, begin to overshadow the quoter’s own material” (pg. 146)'

What is your interpretation of this, dear friends?

"As with redundant and duplicate publication practices, these types of

misrepresentations can distort the conclusions of literature reviews if the various segments of a salami publication or the augmented data that represent data from the same subject sample, are included in a meta analysis under the assumption that all of the data are derived from independent samples. For this reason, data augmentation or fragmentation can have serious negative consequences for the integrity of the scientific database. In certain key areas of biomedical research the consequences can result in policy recommendations that could have adverse public health effects."

http://www.cse.msu.edu/~alexliu/plagiarism.pdf

Thanks dear Prof Mahfuz.  It's a useful link!  Actually all this while, even on RG, I don't plagiarize knowingly!

'Thus, Biros (2000) also cautions that:

“Many authors do not understand the implications of signing the copyright release form. In essence, this transfers ownership of the paper and all of its contents from the author to the publisher. Subsequent papers written by the same author therefore must be careful not to reproduce in any way material that has previously been published, even if it is written by them. Such copying constitutes self-plagiarism.” (p. 4).'

HI Miranda Yeoh; Plagiarism, even self plagiarism  is not ethical in scientific writing as it has been mentioned in attached link. One can follow the following guidelines for avoiding self plagiarism.

Roig (2006) offers writers a comprehensive list of guidelines for avoiding plagiarism, four of which deal specifically with self-plagiarism, as follows:

• Authors who submit a manuscript for publication containing data, reviews, Conclusions, etc., that have already been disseminated in some significant manner (e.g., published as an article in another journal, presented at a conference, posted on the internet) must clearly indicate to the editors and readers the nature of the previous dissemination.

• If the results of a single complex study are best presented as a ‘cohesive’ single whole, they should not be partitioned into individual papers. Furthermore, if there is any doubt as to whether a paper submitted for publication represents fragmented data, authors should enclose other papers (published or unpublished) that might be part of the paper under consideration. Similarly, old data that has been merely augmented with additional data points and that is subsequently presented as a new study is an equally serious ethical breach.

• Because some instances of plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and even some writing practices that might otherwise be acceptable (e.g., extensive paraphrasing or quoting of key elements of a book) can constitute copyright infringement, authors are strongly encouraged to become familiar with basic elements of copyright law.

• While there are some situations where text recycling is an acceptable practice, it may not be so in other situations. Authors are urged to adhere to the spirit of ethical writing and avoid reusing their own previously published text, unless it is done in a manner consistent with standard scholarly conventions (e.g., by using of quotations and proper paraphrasing)

References:

Roig, Miguel. (2006). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. Retrieved from http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~roigm/plagiarism.doc

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/92785/file-5414624-pdf/media/ith-selfplagiarism-whitepaper.pdf

Often, authors take liberty in using their published material for reuse--with or without change of language. Ideally, they must give a reference of the self work so as to make it clear to the reader or the user that the work cited has already been published. That would be quite fair.  The precaution they should use is that they make a firm determination not to use own work without referencing. Sometimes, some authors publish the same paper in another journal with minor alteration of title, or sections of the paper, etc. This can not be accepted at all. The author should also have  the paper reviewed by someone who is aware to the other work of the author. That can also help to avoid embarrassment.

A conference paper is not usually considered to be a publication (unless it is published in a special volume of a journal or a book): so, if it was only on a USB stick or a CD, you don't have to cite your own conference paper (NB! only in case you were the only author of the text/figure/table you plan to use, or if the co-author of your conference paper is also a co-author of the new paper), and you can also send it to a journal even if you only made minor changes. In case the conference paper is online but the copyright still belongs to you, some publishers will not allow you to submit it in the form it is there, as potential reviewers could identify you, and also, as if it is online, this may reduce the chances that the journal paper will be cited (as some people might cite your conference paper instead of your new journal paper). Still, this depends on the publisher, and you should not hide the fact that it is online.

Dear Barbara, thanks for your info: 'Autoplagiat occurs when the author prescribes extensive excerpts published already (or dedicated as part of a senior thesis) of the text. There are different standards stating how many reps is acceptable, the most liberal say about 20%. However, self-respecting authors avoid rewriting the full text of even one paragraph. Autoplagiat is a cause for shame, and sometimes even a crime.'

Actually I dislike plagiarism of any sort.  Even on RG, most of my real friends know that I'm ethical in my writings.

Dear Prof Kamal, thanks for telling me the method to cite my 2014 papers.

Dear Sarwan, this part is important to me: 'While there are some situations where text recycling is an acceptable practice, it may not be so in other situations. Authors are urged to adhere to the spirit of ethical writing and avoid reusing their own previously published text, unless it is done in a manner consistent with standard scholarly conventions (e.g., by using of quotations and proper paraphrasing)'.  

Thanks Prof Debi, this part is what I will heed: ' Ideally, they must give a reference of the self work so as to make it clear to the reader or the user that the work cited has already been published. That would be quite fair. The precaution they should use is that they make a firm determination not to use own work without referencing.'  (I did get info from my dear friend who has many papers on water desalination.  And he told me that he has been putting in time to paraphrase his methods.)

Thanks @Eraldo.  The 2012 paper was submitted to a conference, where I only got a book of abstracts, and a CD where my paper was included.  Several papers presented were not even included in that CD.  Thanks.

Dear Tiia, my paper falls into the category you describe: 'A conference paper is not usually considered to be a publication (unless it is published in a special volume of a journal or a book): so, if it was only on a USB stick or a CD, you don't have to cite your own conference paper'.  Just what I was explaining to Eraldo.

Now for this part: '(NB! only in case you were the only author of the text/figure/table you plan to use, or if the co-author of your conference paper is also a co-author of the new paper), and you can also send it to a journal even if you only made minor changes.'  I didn't put any Figures in that conference paper, but I have 2 new figures for my new paper.

And for this part, dear Tiia: 'In case the conference paper is online but the copyright still belongs to you, some publishers will not allow you to submit it in the form it is there, as potential reviewers could identify you, and also, as if it is online, this may reduce the chances that the journal paper will be cited (as some people might cite your conference paper instead of your new journal paper). Still, this depends on the publisher, and you should not hide the fact that it is online.'  It's online, but the new paper uses an experimental method that involved a control group, while the 2012 paper only used a pretest-posttest method.  Now I know what I should do next.  Thanks Tiia, you can read my mind!  I thank all of you dear friends.

Dear Miranda,

If a paper was presented by a report or poster of the conference, this is the scientific activity but no manuscript. It becomes a publication only if the conference published a collection of papers presented at full volume. Otherwise, you just have to write a paper in detail, to add further your studies and to submit to the journal. This is all you need to do. I am confident that you will have a great new publication.

It appears not to be the case in some parts of the (scientific) world, that conference papers are regarded as secondary, less important publications. I assume that it depends upon the publication conventions in certain disciplines. One professor told me, that he considers papers submitted and accepted for some high quality conferences as even more important than more traditional journal papers, because there is a very strict selection process of manuscripts submitted for those conferences, let's say 1 out of 20 submissions are accepted, irrespective of the quality of the rest of 19.

Thus one should be very careful with and avoid absolute statements and assumptions about what counts as primary, high quality, etc. Things may change pretty fast on the basis of external factors so that traditional wisdom w.r.t. publication and related issues may be obsolete the next year. I don't think this is bad on its own, but of course it challenges authors to stay in close contact with the open science community and to keep a keen eye on indicators of change of publication standards.

Some journals use dedicated siftware to detect if sentences from other articles (also from the same author) are entirely reported in a manuscript. Usually a percentage > 5% is considered plagiarism and the journal invite the authors to review the text changing the sentences. The software is unable to distiguish some definitions that are conventionally accepted worldwide such as the names of the diseases or other technical words. I experienced this aspect with a journal whose Editor asked me to modify some sentences since they were similar to the ones of other my papers. But after a simple linguistic revision, I did not have any more problem and the paper is in press.

I agree with the other partecipants to this forum that the Congress Proceedings are not usually considered to be a publication (unless it is published in a special volume of a journal or a book). Papers in press may be cited.

Finally, the results of a previous paper cannot be reported as original results of a new one. At least they can be the basis of the new study (Introduction) or a point to discuss (Discussion).

For an experienced researcher, self-plagiarism may be easily avoided with some wise habits. On the other hand, a serious reasercher has his own field of expertise and it is easy that every new paper may be a successivee step compared to the previous one.

Dear Valentina, I have been busy writing.  Thanks for your views and your confidence in me: 'It becomes a publication only if the conference published a collection of papers presented at full volume. Otherwise, you just have to write a paper in detail, to add further your studies and to submit to the journal. This is all you need to do. I am confident that you will have a great new publication.'

Thanks Paul, I understand your views: 'Thus one should be very careful with and avoid absolute statements and assumptions about what counts as primary, high quality, etc. Things may change pretty fast on the basis of external factors so that traditional wisdom w.r.t. publication and related issues may be obsolete the next year.'  

I always thought that conferences are good places to disseminate science, whereas journals are probably read by a smaller number of persons, but this may not be right either.  In my field, there were great discoveries in Biology, that were presented as conference proceedings!

Dear Enzo, previous results are discussed in literature review.  It's mainly the review and methodology that are similar, when I work on several topics that use the same method.

Thanks very much for sharing your experiences: 'experienced this aspect with a journal whose Editor asked me to modify some sentences since they were similar to the ones of other my papers. But after a simple linguistic revision, I did not have any more problem and the paper is in press.'  (I'm busy writiing, but I will be responsible to chime in.)

Dear Miranda, I should like to emphasize that when i refer to previous results, I mean your previous already published results. 

Thanks Enzo, I perfectly understand what you said.  Your editor and reviewers took the APA 6th edition seriously indeed.  That must be the difference between journals with IF, and those without IF.  But when I asked one earlier question, no one even mentioned this important point.  So it took a longer time to learn.  Thanks to all :)

Self-plagiarism rises in a gray area between the black and white areas.  In the light of the debate going on these days about self-plagiarism, the best thing you can do is avoid it completely. Anyhow, it is advisable to avoid extensive self-referencing when you write an article.

Thanks dear Prof Mahfuz, for your advice.  I value it.  And I have been working on my paper over the last few days.  Dear Barbara has said earlier, 'self-respecting authors avoid rewriting the full text of even one paragraph'.  But I can't go off to Penang with my friends and students for the Sports Carnival.  They went off early this morning, my time is now 4.45 pm, 6 hour ahead of Jordan.

https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_much_importance_does_your_college_university_place_on_the_nurturing_of_sports_and_or_cultural_talent_What_is_done_to_nurture_such_talents#view=545f4dbfd5a3f200508b458e