How it could be outed?
Does free internet space provide opportunities to extend the phenomenon "Copy-Paste"?
Why no one is interested in discussions related to plagiarizm and ethics in science? I really think this question recently is topical.
Why no one is interested in discussions related to plagiarizm and ethics in science? I really think this question recently is topical.
Dear Valentina
Plagiarism is critical in all domains including science. Unfortunately, the new generation of students do practice extensively "copy-paste" in their projects and costs the instructor lots of work even if using a professional software to detect the action.
I try my best to train my students to recognize the unethical action by giving them more credit when they submit clean projects.
@Valentina, we have copy/paste generation in schools, thanking to internet, yes! Regarding plagiarism in science, there are many software tools for plagiarism detection and prevention. It is not ethical at all that scientist plagiarize even itself! Farrokh Habibzadeh and Karen Shashok wrote an assay about!
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3160704/
If no ethics in work, leads to plagiarism.If the person not believing originality than shortcut leads them to copy/duplication ect .
@Valentina, it is a very good thread! Small number of followers and contributors suggest me to recommend You to share Your question with selected followers, and tag it with 3 more topics like higher education...! Regards!
@Valentina, why do not You upload Your contribution on this issue, plagiarism and ethics in science!? Regards!
Plagiarism is the stealing of others ideas and manipulation of data
The reason for plagiarism is not only the students or new generation researchers. As students are easier to blame for plagiarism.
But I think it is also the sole responsibility of every one students, guides, supervisors, colleague and even family members that they should know about plagiarism and its ethics. The youngsters always follows their older ones.
A hunger for:
Publication numbers and high impact factor is the major reason for plagiarism.
So tries to avoid easier practices.
I agree with all that plagiarism is unethical and illegal. It is the responsibility of everybody, including teachers, students, and parents, to limit plagiarism.
Plagiarism in science could lead to more drastic consequences in the future since the scientific methodology and the analysis of primary data and facts necessitates accuracy, exactness, and a real assessment of errors. Having students who are accustomed to report wrong data or writing false arguments about generated errors in measurement using primary data may lead in the future to a possible disaster.
One way to deal with this is for reviewers to report plagiarism to editors when they review a paper. It's take time and patience to do this, of course, but any editor should reject a paper if plagiarism is identified by a reviewer. Furthermore, if serious plagiarism is identified post-publication, the paper should be withdrawn by the journal with notification to readers. This would be a severe punishment for the plagiarist and should be sufficient to prevent it. Now that we have electronic publishing, journals could tag papers post-publication to reveal minor plagiarism (such as a sentence that has been copied without proper attribution), and this would embarrass the plagiarist, who would then not do it again.
Students do it all the time, and they did it before there was an internet. I know this from experience of over 40 years of university teaching. Some of my students were guilty (they knew it was wrong) while others needed to be taught that it was wrong. Unfortunately, many science teachers and professors do not spend enough time to explain the proper use of quotation marks. They leave it to language teachers, but language teachers are not familiar with standards in scientific writing.
It is a great mistake for students or scientists to try to get ahead by taking short-cuts, such as plagiarism. Eventually they will find themselves in a position in which they are incompetent due to having created an impression of themselves which is false. So I think cheating does not pay off in the long run, and this is the strongest deterrent of all.
I know some universities use a software (ithenticate) which can calculate the similarity index for each presented paper in a few minutes.As i said before, eliminating plagiarism is the responsibility of everybody, including teachers, students, and parents.
Dear Valentina:
I put this on another thread about plagiarism. Free internet is wonderful. I get to read some free research papers and many abstracts, but I must be honest to acknowledge, cite, and never steal other people's sentences. We must warn our students on plagiarism, and get them to do corrections.
Plagiarism is DISHONESTY,
Could be due to lack of intelligence,
More likely due to lack of responsibility,
Quite Obviously it's due to LAZINESS.....
There are many Plagiarism Checkers! It is good when it is multi-lingual! Here is an example of one on-line out of the many available!
http://plagiarisma.net/
Plagiarism is a frequent reason for retraction. Today, we’re pleased to present a guest post by Marya Zilberberg, a physician health services researcher and faculty member at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences. In this post, she describes what it’s like to find out one of your papers has been plagiarized — and how to get satisfaction. Well, sort of.
Right or wrong, peer-reviewed publications in my trade are academic currency. They provide name recognition, invitations to review, edit and speak, and in general make you feel like a part of the “in-crowd.” Of course the most important metric that publications feed are the infamous h-index, which measures how “influential” your studies are by the number of citations they engender. So, like any other artificial grade, it makes sense to engage in intermittent care and watering of your h-index, and mine is pretty good for where I am in my career. Little did I realize that there is an even more important impact metric than the h-index: plagiarism.
Yes, plagiarism. Let me explain.
About two months ago I was trolling the literature and came upon a review paper on ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) by S. Efrati et al, published in 2010 in the Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing. I am definitely a VAP nerd, so I started to read the paper. It did not take me long to come upon this passage:
The standard component of IHI’s approach is ‘‘bundles’’ of care, defined as ‘‘a small, straightforward set of practices—generally three to five—that, when performed collectively and reliably, have been proven to improve patient outcomes’’ [9]. The IHI’s ventilator bundle was originally aimed at reducing complications of mechanical ventilation, and not specifically at VAP prevention [9]. Of the four components in this bundle, three—head of the bed elevation, daily sedation interruption and daily screening for readiness to extubate—are aimed specifically at VAP prevention [9]. Each of these three IHI bundle elements has behind it either a level I (head of the bed elevation and stress bleeding prophylaxis) or level II (use of sedation holidays) evidence individually. In view of this, it is difficult to argue that implementing each of the proposed measures does not amount to good care of patients on mechanical ventilation, supporting the original intent of the mechanical ventilation bundle development [9].
My first thought was “damn, this is a well written passage” followed by “looks familiar.” A split second later I realized why it was familiar: these were my words. Consider the similarities from page 1 of this paper of mine from 2009:
The standard component of IHI’s approach is “bundles” of care, defined as “a small, straightforward set of practices— generally three to five—that, when performed collectively and reliably, have been proven to improve patient outcomes” (10).
And then more, on page 4:
In this context, and in the interest of clarity, the IHIs ventilator bundle was originally aimed generally at reducing complications of MV, and not specifically at VAP prevention (10). Of the four components in this bundle, three—head of the bed elevation, daily sedation interruption and daily screen for readiness to extubate, and stress bleeding prophylaxis—are aimed specifically at VAP prevention (10), mirroring some of the recent guideline recommendations from the American Thoracic Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (6). Each of these three IHI bundle elements has behind it either a level I (head of the bed elevation and stress bleeding prophylaxis) or level II (use of sedation holidays) evidence individually (6). In view of this, it is difficult to argue that implementing each of the proposed measures does not amount to good care of patients on MV, supporting the original intent of the MV bundle development (10).
Hmmm, I thought, naturally, the authors must have cited my paper where they plucked my words, just neglecting to enclose them in quotes. Reference 9, reference 9, reference 9… Hmmm, reference 9 was to the IHI ventilator bundle implementation page. (Guess what the reference 10 in my paper is.) Scanning the rest of the references, not one of the forty-eight had my name in it.
With a mounting indignation, I went back to the text and read on. A more careful reading revealed yet another place where my words were lifted en bloc without bothering to quote or attribute: The final sentence of the “Definition and Epidemiology” section:
Clearly, the combination of the need to improve patient outcomes, the financial impact of improving throughput, and the proposed cut in VAP medicare reimbursement, is serving as a strong impetus to implement practices and policies aimed at reducing the risk of VAP.
It looked suspiciously like what I said in my discussion section (notice, I did capitalize “Medicare”):
Clearly, the combination of the need to improve patient outcomes, the financial impact of improving throughput, and the proposed cut in VAP Medicare reimbursement, is serving as a strong impetus to implement practices and policies aimed at cutting the risk of VAP.
Up until this point, I had had no experience with such blatant theft of my work. So, for advice I turned to one of the two obsessives who runs Retraction Watch, my friend and colleague Ivan Oransky. First, I wanted to make sure I wasn’t crazy, that this really was what plagiarism looked like — I know, duh! And second, I needed to know how to deal with it and what to expect. Ivan confirmed my suspicions, and advised that I correspond with the journal.
I promptly commenced such correspondence on January 6, 2012, with Laura Walsh, the Senior Editor for Medicine at Springer, the publisher of the journal that had published Erfrati’s et al’s paper. When three days later I had not yet heard from Walsh, I sent another message, this time loaded with a tad less patience, and cc:ing Ivan. This did get a reply the following day, January 10, referring me to Springer’s “Ethics in Publishing Policy.” Walsh added:
These matters are addressed as quickly as possible with due consideration to all parties involved. Our first step is to bring this to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief, which has been done. I expect to have his reply very soon and will keep you informed.
I prepared to wait, but intermittently sent an email to check on how things were progressing. In responses to my messages from January 18 (answered same day), February 2 (answered on 2/7) and March 2 (answered the same day) I was told that the matter was in progress, and the Editor-in-Chief was making contact with the authors. Then, at last, on March 5, I received this e-mail from Chief Editor Stephen Rees:
The status with this situation is that I have written to Dr Efrati passing on our concerns. He has acknowledged these problems as a an unfortunate and undeliberate mistake for which he and fellow authors apologize. In line then with the usual Springer policy, we have offered him the opportunity to write an erratum to the paper to this effect which will then be published. In addition, he has been given your email address and offered the opportunity to write to you directly. I have been asked to be copied in on his correspondence.
I am very sorry for your inconvenience with this matter and hope you feel that we have treated it with the seriousness that it deserves.
It has now been a week, and I haven’t heard anything from Efrati.
So, what do I conclude from this kerfuffle?
Plagiarism can happen to any of us.
Journals do not seem to do due diligence when accepting papers.
No offense to this journal, but exactly how many people are going to read the “erratum” and become aware of these authors’ misconduct? And what are the implications for checking their prior and future work?
But the most important point is this: I have made it! Yes, because when your words so mesmerize that others are compelled to channel them, subconsciously and unstoppably, through their keyboards, it has to be the highest form of praise, even if they “neglect” to attribute. So, no “inconvenience” at all, thank you very much.
As an editor-in-chief of a journal and editor and ad hoc editor of many journals, it is not possible to do identify plagiarism when we review paper. In academics, everyone juggle many balls, when the journal editorial office urge you to submit your review, normally it is done at the last minute and mostly submitted as a 'late review'.
It is possible for a reviewer to look for scientific merit of a paper that is given for review, what is written in the paper make sense to the topic, what the graph shows correlates with the interpretation, is ethical clearance sought prior to the beginning of the study, anything out of the ordinary observed, etc. I am not sure reviewers could go out of the way to identify the plagiarism until otherwise, they identified their own work.
I see that most of you seem to be thinking about plagiarism of other works. What about self-plagiarism? -‘reuse,’; 'recycling fraud,’ ; 'salami or duplicate publication,’. It happens all the time with almost all the leading researchers. If we have to select best of the worst evils, you could say copying the works of others could be much worse. However, both has ethical and legal implications.
Hypothetically let us say, you have written a methodology of a paper. You put your heart and soul into it, you crafted, sliced, and polished your text and published that paper. The paper got a rave review. Now, you have to write another paper, with the same technology and same angle - what would you do?
The second question comes to my mind is - if you're an authority on a subject - aren't you asked for the same paper again and again? Journals, journal editors, peers, and others; wants you to write on the very same topic that you have been writing so long! Within an year, how much development might have taken place in that area which warrant for so many papers?
Thridly, type in a text of a disease or a syndrome. For the sake of an example, let's say, 'Syndrome X'. There might be hundreds of reviews and papers within an year written by experts as well as novice researchers. You might even end up noticing that the that the experts might have written more than one. We could ask if all these papers add to the existing literature. Probably not! But still they are out there!
Finally, what if someone else write for the students if they are willing to pay?
Here is one example, http://www.essayexperts.ca/. Every major cities in the world has such services. Would someone prefer 'un-plagiarized writing done by someone else' over a poor student 'writing in a plagiarized manner' just because of the fact he cannot speak or write in English properly and English is not his native language?
So these are some of the issue that either cannot be answered easily or there is no quick fix!
Normally the papers are retracted by reputed journals, if any issues found post-publications.
Plagiarism is as serious as a disease left to grow if no actions are taken.respective of the so many forms it takes, it is wrong. At least, it is our duty to address it whenever we deal with our students at whatever level they are, yes many students are buying the work, this is why I change the terms and conditions of what I want and make it vigorously every time so that such students have hard times with whoever is writing for them, and still I catch them because I know every style of writing in my classes. Now, plagiarism in science is more dramatic, I feel it is an offense, consequently, I also take drastic measures (failing students if not abiding by the rules).
My colleagues in this thread gave many examples, thank you, however, we must also take action. As for the case presented by Mehdi, there are many blogs on social media where I can claim my rights by exposing the journal as well as the plagiarizers whoever they are (:-)))
Dear Pandi-Perumal, your classification to plagiarism areas is excellent and highly informative, however, it will be great if you or any experienced editor shows the percentages accepted as standards of acceptable use of other's lines or statements. That is, if I use a specific software to detect plagiarism, what % is ok? Along the different dimensions mentioned.
Regards
Dear All, Please read this web link:-
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/plag/5240451.0001.001/--cases-of-plagiarism-handled?rgn=main;view=fulltext
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_range_of_percentage_similarity_of_plagiarism_for_a_review_article
Pandi, thank you for the hint. I went there (to the thread) and the ongoing discussion brings us to respect the researcher's own judgement and ethics rather than depending on a tool which may classify any word as plagiarized.
Ranges were suggested from 5 to 15%, other places up to 25%, and even some do not accept more than 5% or simply put 100 words!
I guess every journal has its own policy, as researchers we rely on our sense of judgement of what is ethical and giving credit to whoever we use his/her quotations.
A good article entitled "PLAGIARISM IN SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING"
Acta Inform Med. Dec 2012; 20(4): 208–213.
doi: 10.5455/aim.2012.20.208-213
PMCID: PMC3558294
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3558294/
My personal response on plagiarism in science is highly negative. But today in our armamentarium against it are special antiplagiaristic programms, which will I hope stop this process and protect the "clearness" of real science.
Thank you Ljubomir and Behrouz for sharing. I am sure we all agree on the seriousness of the issue under discussion.
Plagiarism is a serious problem and has to be taken seriously by research community.
Here is a very recent article which discusses the responsibilities of scientists
Fraud in science: a plea for a new culture in research
There have been a worrying number of cases recently of plagiarism and fraud in relation to scientific publication. Whilst this is not new, it is noticeable that little has been written about the responsibilities of scientists to behave in an honest and reliable manner and to identify misbehaviour at an early stage and initiate actions to stop it. The Editorial in this issue of the International Journal of Obesity is jointly published in our sister journal, the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (EJCN), and written by Editor, Manfred Müller, and his colleagues. It highlights the ethos and philosophy of science and the processes that need to be followed when the problems of fraud arise. This article also identifies the need to ensure that young scientists during their training are made fully aware of their responsibilities to ensure these issues are not perpetuated by future generations of scientists.
http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v38/n4/abs/ijo201416a.html
Behrouz, I join Asmat in his comment. Thanks for sharing.
I teach Research Methods in the MBA program, and I always emphasize the researcher's ethical stance strongly.
Dear @Valentina, the issue of plagiarism in science is a challenging issue in the scientific community; to overcome this challenging problem, I think that there must be tough regulations to prevent it.
Two interesting article from nature
1) Research ethics: 3 ways to blow the whistle
Reporting suspicions of scientific fraud is rarely easy, but some paths are more effective than others.
2)Science publishing: How to stop plagiarism
http://www.nature.com/news/research-ethics-3-ways-to-blow-the-whistle-1.14226
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v481/n7379/full/481021a.html
It seems that cheaters and plagirizers never cease to amaze in terms of creativity of how to implement their stuff, a creativity that is used for devlish causes, instead of angelic like deeds.
Dear Fethi Bin Muhammad Belgasem,
Recently I saw a mother who wrote multiplication tables on the nails of his daughter before the test in second grade.
This image is aerobatics, far more complex than the multiplication table.
Thank you for the picture.
Best regards
Valentina
The Internet brings forward many alternatives and sources, however, we must emphasize that researchers/scientists are ethical filters to what is appropriate and what is not. Unfortunately and as Abderrahmane has asserted some scientists are crossing the red-line of ethical conduct for quick fixes in research records.
Plagiarism of all types must be avoided, checked and corrected to the best.
What do you think about plagiarism at ResearchGate dear @Valentina? It should be science too! There are many plagiarised answers in Q&A.
Of course dear @S G. Tan. Please do see my answer 65, link follows. Many colleagues did not join the discussion in order to comment and condemn plagiarism, the massive one of copy/paste type.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_plagiarism_a_key_to_receive_upvotes_in_RG_answers/7
Yesterday I went to the Postgraduate Center, near the C3 center at UNAM (Center of Complexity Sciences) to hear a conference on complexity sciences, the doctor in medicine Alexandre de Pomposo defined very well plagiarism in science: "It is the cancer of Science", I think that all of us, who once have suffered the robbery of an idea, project or scientific research publication, agree with this "medical" diagnosis in Science. It is not only matter of the outrageous injure inflicted against a person -maybe by an even very near coworker of chief-, but to the Science itself where goodwill and mutual trust and confidence must be the basis of all professional collaboration.
Our Colleague Gabriel presented a very serious issue, and if plagiarism in science reaches to the level of being the Cancer of Science, then I think the alarm signal should be so high and of concern.
Dear @Valentina was very right. Free internet space provide opportunities to extend the phenomenon "Copy-Paste". Yes. Dear @Hussin, dear friends, see some examples of such phenomenon in my answer from previous page.
Regarding the definition of cancer by @Gabriel, I do agree. It is the same as we say for corruption as cancer of society. Is there any link between these two diseases?
I am free to recommend my thread about plagiarism. Almost 370 answers, very good responses. Please, be my guests. Thanks.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_do_you_think_about_plagiarism_especially_when_it_is_related_to_high_Government_officials?_tpcectx=qa_overview_asked&_trid=pd71ljhBpPt5NhoOhE0hLVhc_
I think that all right must be respected. As there is author rights, editor rights, publisher rights, etc. all must be according with the right. But the true interest of a publication is disseminate the truth or the science, but respecting all the right.
It is a way to keep the method and style of writing each researcher but the true interest of a publication is disseminate the truth or the science
I think plagiarism continues to manifest itself in the work of researchers and students mostly because a large part of the academic community often chooses to "look the other way," thus avoiding conflict or embarassment for individuals, departments or institutions. I have seen cases where denouncing plagiarism is considered to be more worthy of scorn than committing it. I have also seen colleagues that fail students for plagiarism, but defend other colleagues when their plagiarism is exposed. Honest academics should denounce plagiarism wherever and whenever it appears, in spite of the consequences. A more Quixotic sort of idealism is called for.
Dear David Charles Wright, As one Honest academic I’ve denounced plagiarism in one Mexican university, I've was considered like recalcitrant (revoltosa) and for several years I was blocked in this institution. This is one of the reasons I decided to study abroad. Unfortunately I realize that plagiarism it's alive everywhere in different scale. Now as PhD student I saw several of my ideas going throw my PhD teachers papers...
I agree completely. Until and unless plagiarism and fraud are viewed seriously and considered as hideous crimes against humanity by all academics, they will continue to grow and spread like aggressive malignant cancerous tumors especially via the internet. This will render all publications suspect and not only those published in bogus journals. Hence, the trust upon which academic publications are accepted as the truth will be undermined resulting in serious implications for the progress of knowledge in all fields of human endeavor.
Dear @Torres, you could report the cases to COPE, as well as to receive adequate protection, advocacy ...!
http://publicationethics.org/
Hi All, It is true that this phenomenon is increasing like any thing and scientists are indifferent to talk on this issue too. In my opinion one has to follow the ethics in science and matter should be dealt with strong punishment. Thanks
Dear All,
Unfortunately, plagiarism is spread like pest. The most important concern is that plagiarism however in words condemned, allowed in practice, even it is the basis of personnel, pseudo-scientific and interest nets. The approach to plagiarism is a fully hypocrite consideration. I can see every day the various forms – brutal and simple, refined and masked - of plagiarism among students and so called scientists. Most people think this is a pardonable little inaccuracy.
Dear @Ljubomir it wasn't possible at the time I found plagiarism on 2000, I losted a lot of time trying to do something, They just sayed I was right my BA thesis was in his work (at 90%), he got a master degree with my work... and he didn't get nothing because my work didn't had copyright, and because several persons were involved in the case, instead I didn't had a promotion or a better job.
Dear Claudia: I am sorry to hear about your troubles in Mexico. Three and a half years ago I had to change departments because I denounced a blatant case of plagiarism, and was attacked by a small group of colleagues who defended the plagiarist. I am grateful, in hindsight, because the department where I now work has a healthier environment.
I continue with my Quixotic mission; three students failed my classes this week for including fragments of text written by other authors in their final research reports. It's always a sad situation when this happens, but it would be worse to pretend it isn't happening. In the classroom setting I think it is important to give students a clear definition of plagiarism at the beginning of the semester, and to teach them how to work without plagiarizing. At the end, if they are caught doing this, at least they have to admit that they were given a fair chance. This is important because many students (and some professors) think that copying and pasting text is a normal part of academic work.
Good approach David. Students have to really understand the policy of the institution toward plagiarism, as well as the strict rules inside the class of how to avoid it. Putting things into action (penalty) is a must to enforce the policies. However, the only problem that may arise is the fact that other instructors do not take things as seriously.
Dear Valentina
Even in the era of modern technology and an internet plagiarism in science remains an issue which continue and will remain since it is related to ethic and regulationshow strong or how loose thy are
Dear David,
The situation in Hungary is similar. Here also many students and some? professors imagine/consider that the easy way of copying from books, is allowed in MSc theses. Every year I found and criticise about 60% of students whose thesis I review. Generally, regarding the bosses' opinion, this is the normal way.
Dear @Valentina, there are about 250 publications available here at ResearchGate database about plagiarism, self-plagiarism...
https://www.researchgate.net/search.Search.html?type=publication&query=plagiarism%20in%20science&previous=question
RG is becoming a good source of primary data specially if experiential details are relevant for somebody doing research.
Plagiarism is endemic across disciplines, whether sciences, social sciences, arts or humanities. We have been using a web based software Turnitin and this has helped to raise awareness of the damaging elements plagiarism. It has also helped to drastically reduce the incidence of easy and convenient plagiarism.
A lot of colleagues are copying and pasting on ReseachGate question pages, even using sources like Wikipedia. I guess they are desperate to raise their RG scores! I suggest that we look harder at answers before encouraging this practice by upvoting plagiarism.
A few times I have pointed out blatant cases on these question pages. Some colleagues see this as an agression and defend the plagiarists!
As professional educators and researchers I believe that we must set high ethical and methodological standards for the upcoming generations.
I second your approach and also encourage colleagues to follow suit. We are the first ones to put the right example and we are held responsible & accountable to it.
Internet provides many possibilities to copy-paste phenomenon. For this reason nonelectronic books with author rights remain in the market, at least, it would need recopy the texts to do plagiarism of it.
Dear Mariano
Right, but still whoever intends to plagiarize need not an electronic version to do it. What matters is the person's intention to do things right and with respect to the rules of citations and giving credit to its rightful owner.
Dear Mariano,
I know a Hungarian university teacher who is a master of plagiarism. His method is the following: he borrowed mainly popular-scientific books written about 15-25 years ago from the university library. He had them scanned by PhD students and then he changed some of the original titles and put his name in as the author. All these “scientific” products were financed, published and printed using EU projects for enhancing rural agriculture/plant protection (in so called Interreg projects). He started his activity by simple copying from scientific books for brochures for farmers.
Dear David,
You are fully right. What is strange, most RG participants accept and acknowledge this kind of plagiarism even these plagiarisers got often the most RG scores in some threads. This shows clearly the value of RG scores.
I am afraid this approach is antiscientific, ethically unacceptable and shows the demands of many RG peers.
Yes, Andrés. A bigger concern for me is that ResearchGate mirrors the academic world in general. I think the problem is systemic: the game imposed on us, in essence collecting points for evaluation, is lowering the quality of our work. Even those who don't resort to plagiarism are pressured to crank out study after study, because if we work too long on a single problem, we come out losing in this strange new game, as others have noted on this thread.
David,
perfect summation of the issue. Speed and quantity seem to trump (fitting term these days) prudence and quality in many research endeavors.
In my field (archaeology) I'm finding that "this strange new game" is producing a lot of "theory"-heavy (put into quotation mark advisedly, for not everything that is claimed to be theory actually is) studies that are pretty much useless when one looks at the underlying "hard data," especially for comparative purposes. It is of course much quicker and easier just to sit in an office theorizing (and/or googling/copying and pasting) away as opposed to having to come up with research designs, budgets, analytical frameworks, and suchlike. Maybe formulated a bit drastically, but there you have it.
Also, if you are dumb enough (as I was) to do 7 years of fieldwork for a PhD, you've already lost. End of story.
Michael: Do you think there is a way to share the more interesting or relevant aspects of your fieldwork in small packages (articles, chapters and conference papers), thus turning those years of hard work into something that can work to your advantage in the system? (I know, I know. I'm reflecting our collective conditioning by the points game. But it is more useful to turn genuine science into points than to start with the goal of generating points and produce pseudoscience.)
Dear @David, I do remember some of your comments regarding copy/paste plagiarism. I have reacted so many times about the same issue. Please, see the attached link. I am speaking about most popular answer and my comment about plagiarised answer. Answers are dated October 28 and 29th respectively.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_could_happen_if_we_all_become_Centenarians/19
Yes, Ljubomir, plagiarism is ubiquitous: on ResearchGate, in the classroom, and in academic publications. Both times that I have edited collective books, I have had to exclude chapters because of plagiarism. The common response by plagiarists and other academics involved is: "What is wrong with you? Everyone is doing it." The situation has gotten so bad that many colleagues consider exposing plagiarism to be worse than doing it. "Why rock the boat?"
The answer to the last question is that the academic community will lose whatever legitimacy and credibility it still possesses if we do not struggle to maintain a high ethical standard in our work, so...
Keep on rocking!
Recently, I found a case of plagiarism in a serious journal: one of the coauthors from the earlier version of an article (that was rejected by one journal) disappeared in the latest version and was substituted by other coauthor, who did not participated in the project. What do you think about it?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education