Currently, in publication a paper, we have the term called self plagiarism. In short, self-plagiarism is any attempt to take any of your own previously published text, papers, or research results and make it appear brand new. So, your own words may not belong to you. This, in my opinion is less acceptable, especially if what we use is only part of a paragraph.
Do you agree with this term? Please give your comment.
Thank you.
Nazaruddin - it depends on context. I regularly cite my own work but I do so against the fact that I have a long-established publication record in my main discipline area and have published quite extensively. If I look related work in the area, by other authors, they regularly cite my work as well - so why would I not do the same? It also depends on the nature of the article. For instance, if it is conceptual, model-development etc - then the editor/reader has to be convinced that the author is coming from an area of personal expertise based on their own work.
On the other hand, if I only cited my work to the detriment of all the other work available, then I believe that is where the practice is questionable. If the intent is purely to increase personal citation, then this is unethical. My discipline is reasonably broad so I can draw on a multitude of other works. Some colleagues I know work in highly specialised 'niche' disciplines whereby only a very small pool of researchers work. They have limited specialist journals that they can publish in and, often, they are the main source of available publications - so they have to self-cite.
Self-plagiarism, as a term, is a bit of an 'oxymoron'. You can't plagiarise yourself - because it is your own work. However, you can be accused of 'salami-slicing'. This is a more appropriate term that identifies where authors publish multiple 'slightly different' versions of the same article - and try to pass them off as if they are different or original. Again - this is unethical. This is one of the reasons now why many journals submit accepted/for review manuscripts via plagiarism software.
Nazaruddin - it depends on context. I regularly cite my own work but I do so against the fact that I have a long-established publication record in my main discipline area and have published quite extensively. If I look related work in the area, by other authors, they regularly cite my work as well - so why would I not do the same? It also depends on the nature of the article. For instance, if it is conceptual, model-development etc - then the editor/reader has to be convinced that the author is coming from an area of personal expertise based on their own work.
On the other hand, if I only cited my work to the detriment of all the other work available, then I believe that is where the practice is questionable. If the intent is purely to increase personal citation, then this is unethical. My discipline is reasonably broad so I can draw on a multitude of other works. Some colleagues I know work in highly specialised 'niche' disciplines whereby only a very small pool of researchers work. They have limited specialist journals that they can publish in and, often, they are the main source of available publications - so they have to self-cite.
Self-plagiarism, as a term, is a bit of an 'oxymoron'. You can't plagiarise yourself - because it is your own work. However, you can be accused of 'salami-slicing'. This is a more appropriate term that identifies where authors publish multiple 'slightly different' versions of the same article - and try to pass them off as if they are different or original. Again - this is unethical. This is one of the reasons now why many journals submit accepted/for review manuscripts via plagiarism software.
It doesn't matter because you just have to follow whatever the reviewers tell you to do, unless you have a good reason otherwise
I think plagiarism concept should be followed whether it is self or taken from others. If plagiarism is not there, then the research papers get more number of repetitive sentences either self or others. For figure titles, references, mathematical formulae and symbols, plagiarism check can be avoided. After checking our paper for plagiarism, the matter can be written in a different manner to convey the same meaning of sentence.
Hi,
If you cite yourself in an appropriate manner, this is not called self-plagiarism, but rather "citations". if you would like to make sure that it is citations, then when you copy a whole part of your previous paper add quotation marks, and inside put your name, year and page number. If you copy the previous information indirectly, then your surname and year inside the quotation marks will suffice.
It depends on the context, but also on the type of using your own previously published work. In my opinion, it's not self-plagiarism when you cite your own works when writing theoretical background or if you are making a review. But, if we take too much text without referencing on previously published - your or other researcher's work - it could be problematic. I mean, there is possibility of serious abuse and, maybe, some researcher will have ''an excellent idea'' - write one paper and publish it in several texts.
One can use one's own conclusive quotes again and again (like 'health is wealth'; 'exocytosis in prokaryotes', etc) in order to push the theme into mainstream.
There is a correlation between similarity and plagiarism. In most journals, the similarity must be less than 25% (using Turnitin or iThenticate). It includes the words/sentences with quotes or/and citations (both from our own papers and others). So, what does it mean, according to comments above?
Self plagiarism should also be taken care by the author who is publishing paper. Plagiarism check is applied to each and everyone and not individual. If more content repitition is there it is better to modify the sentence. However, references and symbols cannot be modified.
We can using previous papers or articles as citations for current studies by mentioned it in the reference and change the arranging of the sentences to avoid plagiarism.
It is possible to take the information you need from your previous research and some words because it is impossible to say a word that is not spoken by others by all the words are similar and the person learns from the experiences of others
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Papers