Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the representation of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work.[1][2]

For other uses, see Plagiarism (disambiguation).

Plagiarism is considered academic dishonesty and a breach of journalistic ethics. It is subject to sanctions such as penalties, suspension, expulsion from school[3] or work,[4] substantial fines[5][6] and even incarceration.[7][8] Recently, cases of "extreme plagiarism" have been identified in academia.[9] The modern concept of plagiarism as immoral and originality as an ideal emerged in Europe in the 18th century, particularly with the Romantic movement.

Plagiarism is not in itself a crime, but like counterfeiting fraud can be punished in a court[10][11] for prejudices caused by copyright infringement,[12][13] violation of moral rights,[14] or torts. In academia and industry, it is a serious ethical offense.[15][16] Plagiarism and copyright infringement overlap to a considerable extent, but they are not equivalent concepts,[17] and many types of plagiarism do not constitute copyright infringement, which is defined by copyright law and may be adjudicated by courts.

Plagiarism might not be the same in all countries. Some countries, such as India and Poland, consider plagiarism to be a crime, and there have been cases of people being imprisoned for plagiarizing.[18] In other instances plagiarism might be the complete opposite of "academic dishonesty," in fact some countries find the act of plagiarizing a professional's work flattering.[19] Students who move to the United States from countries where plagiarism is not frowned upon often find the transition difficult.[20]

Etymology

In the 1st century, the use of the Latin word "plagiarius" (literally "kidnapper") to denote stealing someone else's work was pioneered by the Roman poet Martial, who complained that another poet had "kidnapped his verses". Plagiary, a derivative of plagiarus, was introduced into English in 1601 by dramatist Ben Jonson during the Jacobean Era to describe someone guilty of literary theft.[15][21]

The derived form plagiarism was introduced into English around 1620.[22] The Latin plagiārius, "kidnapper", and plagium, "kidnapping", have the root plaga ("snare", "net"), based on the Indo-European root *-plak, "to weave" (seen for instance in Greek plekein, Bulgarian "плета" pleta, and Latin plectere, all meaning "to weave").

Hannah Glasse's signature at the top of the first chapter of her book, The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy, 6th Edition, 1758, an attempted defence against rampant plagiarism

Although plagiarism in some contexts is considered theft or stealing, the concept does not exist in a legal sense, although the use of someone else's work in order to gain academic credit may meet some legal definitions of fraud.[23] "Plagiarism" specifically is not mentioned in any current statute, either criminal or civil.[24][16] Some cases may be treated as unfair competition or a violation of the doctrine of moral rights.[16] In short, people are asked to use the guideline, "if you did not write it yourself, you must give credit".[25]

Plagiarism is not the same as copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different concepts, and false claims of authorship generally constitute plagiarism regardless of whether the material is protected by copyright. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material whose use is restricted by copyright is used without consent. Plagiarism, in contrast, is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author's reputation, or the obtaining of academic credit, that is achieved through false claims of authorship. Thus, plagiarism is considered a moral offense against the plagiarist's audience (for example, a reader, listener, or teacher).

Plagiarism is also considered a moral offense against anyone who has provided the plagiarist with a benefit in exchange for what is specifically supposed to be original content (for example, the plagiarist's publisher, employer, or teacher). In such cases, acts of plagiarism may sometimes also form part of a claim for breach of the plagiarist's contract, or, if done knowingly, for a civil wrong.

In academia and journalism

Within academia, plagiarism by students, professors, or researchers is considered academic dishonesty or academic fraud, and offenders are subject to academic censure, up to and including expulsion. Some institutions use plagiarism detection software to uncover potential plagiarism and to deter students from plagiarizing. However, plagiarism detection software doesn't always yield accurate results and there are loopholes in these systems.[26] Some universities address the issue of academic integrity by providing students with thorough orientations, required writing courses, and clearly articulated honor codes.[27] Indeed, there is a virtually uniform understanding among college students that plagiarism is wrong.[27] Nevertheless, each year students are brought before their institutions’ disciplinary boards on charges that they have misused sources in their schoolwork."[27] However, the practice of plagiarizing by use of sufficient word substitutions to elude detection software, known as rogeting, has rapidly evolved as students and unethical academics seek to stay ahead of detection software.[28]

An extreme form of plagiarism, known as contract cheating involves students paying someone else, such as an essay mill, to do their work for them.[23]

In journalism, plagiarism is considered a breach of journalistic ethics, and reporters caught plagiarizing typically face disciplinary measures ranging from suspension to termination of employment.[29] Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include quotations or give the appropriate citation. While plagiarism in scholarship and journalism has a centuries-old history, the development of the Internet, where articles appear as electronic text, has made the physical act of copying the work of others much easier.[30]

Predicated upon an expected level of learning/comprehension having been achieved, all associated academic accreditation becomes seriously undermined if plagiarism is allowed to become the norm within academic submissions.[31]

For professors and researchers, plagiarism is punished by sanctions ranging from suspension to termination, along with the loss of credibility and perceived integrity.[32][33] Charges of plagiarism against students and professors are typically heard by internal disciplinary committees, by which students and professors have agreed to be bound.[34] Plagiarism is a common reason for academic research papers to be retracted.[35]

Academia
One form of academic plagiarism involves appropriating a published article and modifying it slightly to avoid suspicion.

No universally adopted definition of academic plagiarism exists;[36] however, this section provides several definitions to exemplify the most common characteristics of academic plagiarism.

According to Bela Gipp[37] academic plagiarism encompasses:

"The use of ideas, concepts, words, or structures
without appropriately acknowledging the source
to benefit in a setting where originality is expected."[37]

The definition by B. Gipp is an abridged version of Teddi Fishman's definition of plagiarism, which proposed five elements characteristic of plagiarism.[38] According to T. Fishman, plagiarism occurs when someone:

  1. Uses words, ideas, or work products
  2. Attributable to another identifiable person or source
  3. Without attributing the work to the source from which it was obtained
  4. In a situation in which there is a legitimate expectation of original authorship
  5. In order to obtain some benefit, credit, or gain which need not be monetary[38]

Furthermore, plagiarism is defined differently among institutions of higher learning and universities:

  • Stanford defines plagiarism as the "use, without giving reasonable and appropriate credit to or acknowledging the author or source, of another person's original work, whether such work is made up of code, formulas, ideas, language, research, strategies, writing or other form."[39]
  • Yale views plagiarism as the "... use of another's work, words, or ideas without attribution," which includes "... using a source's language without quoting, using information from a source without attribution, and paraphrasing a source in a form that stays too close to the original."[40]
  • Princeton describes plagiarism as the "deliberate" use of "someone else's language, ideas, or other original (not common-knowledge) material without acknowledging its source."[41]
  • Oxford College of Emory University characterizes plagiarism as the use of "a writer's ideas or phraseology without giving due credit."[42]
  • Brown defines plagiarism as "... appropriating another person's ideas or words (spoken or written) without attributing those word or ideas to their true source."[43]
  • The U.S. Naval Academy defines plagiarism as "the use of the words, information, insights, or ideas of another without crediting that person through proper citation."[44]

Forms of academic plagiarism

Different classifications of academic plagiarism forms have been proposed. Many classifications follow a behavioral approach, i.e., they seek to classify the actions undertaken by plagiarists.

For example, a 2015 survey of teachers and professors by Turnitin,[45] identified 10 main forms of plagiarism that students commit:

  1. Submitting someone's work as their own.
  2. Taking passages from their own previous work without adding citations (self-plagiarism).
  3. Re-writing someone's work without properly citing sources.
  4. Using quotations but not citing the source.
  5. Interweaving various sources together in the work without citing.
  6. Citing some, but not all, passages that should be cited.
  7. Melding together cited and uncited sections of the piece.
  8. Providing proper citations, but failing to change the structure and wording of the borrowed ideas enough (close paraphrasing).
  9. Inaccurately citing a source.
  10. Relying too heavily on other people's work, failing to bring original thought into the text.

A 2019 systematic literature review on academic plagiarism detection[46] deductively derived a technically oriented typology of academic plagiarism from the linguistic model of language consisting of lexis, syntax, and semantics extended by a fourth layer to capture the plagiarism of ideas and structures.The typology categorizes plagiarism forms according to the layer of the model they affect:

  • Characters-preserving plagiarism
    • Verbatim copying without proper citation
  • Syntax-preserving plagiarism
    • Synonym substitution
    • Technical disguise (e.g. using identically looking glyphs from another alphabet)
  • Semantics-preserving plagiarism
  • Idea-preserving plagiarism
    • Appropriation of ideas or concepts
    • Reusing text structure
  • Ghostwriting

Sanctions for student plagiarism

In the academic world, plagiarism by students is usually considered a very serious offense that can result in punishments such as a failing grade on the particular assignment, the entire course, or even being expelled from the institution.[3] The seriousness with which academic institutions address student plagiarism may be tempered by a recognition that students may not fully understand what plagiarism is. A 2015 study showed that students who were new to university study did not have a good understanding of even the basic requirements of how to attribute sources in written academic work, yet students were very confident that they understood what referencing and plagiarism are.[47] The same students also had a lenient view of how plagiarism should be penalised.

For cases of repeated plagiarism, or for cases in which a student commits severe plagiarism (e.g., purchasing an assignment), suspension or expulsion may occur. There has been historic concern about inconsistencies in penalties administered for university student plagiarism, and a plagiarism tariff was devised in 2008 for UK higher education institutions in an attempt to encourage some standardization of approaches.[48]

However, to impose sanctions, plagiarism needs to be detected. Strategies faculty members use to detect plagiarism include carefully reading students work and making note of inconsistencies in student writing, citation errors and providing plagiarism prevention education to students.[49] It has been found that a significant share of (university) teachers do not use detection methods such as using text-matching software.[50] A few more try to detect plagiarism by reading term-papers specifically for plagiarism, while the latter method might be not very effective in detecting plagiarism – especially when plagiarism from unfamiliar sources needs to be detected.[50] There are checklists of tactics to prevent student plagiarism.[51]

Criminal and negative behaviour by diploma mills

There are allegations that some diploma mills take students' money for essays, then produce a low standard essay or close their websites without providing the purchased essay. Students then have little time to provide an essay before a deadline. Also diploma mills have allegedly blackmailed students demanding more money than was originally agreed and threatening to reveal plagiarism to the university unless more money is paid. Sorana Vieru of the NUS said, “We would urge those who are struggling to seek support through their unions and universities rather than looking to a quick fix, and be aware that using these websites could cost not only money but jeopardise their qualifications.”[52]

There are calls for diploma mills to be made illegal in the United Kingdom; in New Zealand and some jurisdictions in the United States they are already illegal.[53]

Plagiarism education

Given the serious consequences that plagiarism has for students, there has been a call for a greater emphasis on learning in order to help students avoid committing plagiarism.[54][55][56] This is especially important when students move to a new institution that may have a different view of the concept when compared with the view previously developed by the student.[57] Indeed, given the seriousness of plagiarism accusations for a student's future, the pedagogy of plagiarism education may need to be considered ahead of the pedagogy of the discipline being studied.[54] The need for plagiarism education extends to academic staff, who may not completely understand what is expected of their students or the consequences of misconduct.[58][49][59]

Factors influencing students' decision to plagiarize

Several studies investigated factors that influence the decision to plagiarize. For example, a panel study with students from German universities found that academic procrastination predicts the frequency plagiarism conducted within six months followed the measurement of academic procrastination.[60] It has been argued that by plagiarizing students cope with the negative consequences that result from academic procrastination such as poor grades. Another study found that plagiarism is more frequent if students perceive plagiarism as beneficial and if they have the opportunity to plagiarize.[61] When students had expected higher sanctions and when they had internalized social norms that define plagiarism as very objectionable, plagiarism was less likely to occur.

Journalism

Since journalism relies on the public trust, a reporter's failure to honestly acknowledge their sources undercuts a newspaper or television news show's integrity and undermines its credibility. Journalists accused of plagiarism are often suspended from their reporting tasks while the charges are being investigated by the news organization.[62]

Self-plagiarism
See also: Duplicate publication

The reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one's own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or citing the original work is sometimes described as "self-plagiarism"; the term "recycling fraud" has also been used to describe this practice.[63] Articles of this nature are often referred to as duplicate or multiple publication. In addition there can be a copyright issue if copyright of the prior work has been transferred to another entity. Self-plagiarism is considered a serious ethical issue in settings where someone asserts that a publication consists of new material, such as in publishing or factual documentation.[64] It does not apply to public-interest texts, such as social, professional, and cultural opinions usually published in newspapers and magazines.[65]

In academic fields, self-plagiarism occurs when an author reuses portions of their own published and copyrighted work in subsequent publications, but without attributing the previous publication.[66][67] Identifying self-plagiarism is often difficult because limited reuse of material is accepted both legally (as fair use) and ethically.[68] Many people mostly, but not limited to critics of copyright and "intellectual property" do not believe it is possible to plagiarize oneself.[69] Those critical of the concept of Plagiarism,[70] or strive for the abolition of copyright itself use the concept of self-plagiarism as a reductio ad absurdum argument.

Contested definition

Miguel Roig has written at length about the topic of self-plagiarism[67][71][72][73] and his definition of self-plagiarism as using previously disseminated work is widely accepted among scholars of the topic. However, the term "self-plagiarism" has been challenged as being self-contradictory, an oxymoron,[74] and on other grounds.[75]

For example, Stephanie J. Bird[76] argues that self-plagiarism is a misnomer, since by definition plagiarism concerns the use of others' material. Bird identifies the ethical issues of "self-plagiarism" as those of "dual or redundant publication". She also notes that in an educational context, "self-plagiarism" refers to the case of a student who resubmits "the same essay for credit in two different courses." As David B. Resnik clarifies, "Self-plagiarism involves dishonesty but not intellectual theft."[77]

According to Patrick M. Scanlon,[78] "self-plagiarism" is a term with some specialized currency. Most prominently, it is used in discussions of research and publishing integrity in biomedicine, where heavy publish-or-perish demands have led to a rash of duplicate and "salami-slicing" publication, the reporting of a single study's results in "least publishable units" within multiple articles (Blancett, Flanagin, & Young, 1995; Jefferson, 1998; Kassirer & Angell, 1995; Lowe, 2003; McCarthy, 1993; Schein & Paladugu, 2001; Wheeler, 1989). Roig (2002) offers a useful classification system including four types of self-plagiarism: duplicate publication of an article in more than one journal; partitioning of one study into multiple publications, often called salami-slicing; text recycling; and copyright infringement.

Codes of ethics

Some academic journals have codes of ethics that specifically refer to self-plagiarism. For example, the Journal of International Business Studies.[79] Some professional organizations like the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) have created policies that deal specifically with self-plagiarism.[80] Other organizations do not make specific reference to self-plagiarism such as the American Political Science Association (APSA). The organization published a code of ethics that describes plagiarism as "...deliberate appropriation of the works of others represented as one's own." It does not make any reference to self-plagiarism. It does say that when a thesis or dissertation is published "in whole or in part", the author is "not ordinarily under an ethical obligation to acknowledge its origins."[81] The American Society for Public Administration (ASPA) also published a code of ethics that says its members are committed to: "Ensure that others receive credit for their work and contributions," but it makes no reference to self-plagiarism.[82]

Factors that justify reuse

Pamela Samuelson, in 1994, identified several factors she says excuse reuse of one's previously published work, that make it not self-plagiarism.[68] She relates each of these factors specifically to the ethical issue of self-plagiarism, as distinct from the legal issue of fair use of copyright, which she deals with separately. Among other factors that may excuse reuse of previously published material Samuelson lists the following:

  1. The previous work must be restated to lay the groundwork for a new contribution in the second work.
  2. Portions of the previous work must be repeated to deal with new evidence or arguments.
  3. The audience for each work is so different that publishing the same work in different places is necessary to get the message out.
  4. The author thinks they said it so well the first time that it makes no sense to say it differently a second time.

Samuelson states she has relied on the "different audience" rationale when attempting to bridge interdisciplinary communities. She refers to writing for different legal and technical communities, saying: "there are often paragraphs or sequences of paragraphs that can be bodily lifted from one article to the other. And, in truth, I lift them." She refers to her own practice of converting "a technical article into a law review article with relatively few changes—adding footnotes and one substantive section" for a different audience.[68]

Samuelson describes misrepresentation as the basis of self-plagiarism.[68] She also states "Although it seems not to have been raised in any of the self-plagiarism cases, copyrights law's fair use defense would likely provide a shield against many potential publisher claims of copyright infringement against authors who reused portions of their previous works."[68]

Organizational publications

Plagiarism is presumably not an issue when organizations issue collective unsigned works since they do not assign credit for originality to particular people. For example, the American Historical Association's "Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct" (2005) regarding textbooks and reference books states that, since textbooks and encyclopedias are summaries of other scholars' work, they are not bound by the same exacting standards of attribution as original research and may be allowed a greater "extent of dependence" on other works.[83] However, even such a book does not make use of words, phrases, or paragraphs from another text or follow too closely the other text's arrangement and organization, and the authors of such texts are also expected to "acknowledge the sources of recent or distinctive findings and interpretations, those not yet a part of the common understanding of the profession."[83]

In the arts

The history of the arts
Comparison of a woodblock print by Hiroshige (left) to its copy by Vincent van Gogh

Through all of the history of literature and of the arts in general, works of art are for a large part repetitions of the tradition; to the entire history of artistic creativity belong plagiarism, literary theft, appropriation, incorporation, retelling, rewriting, recapitulation, revision, reprise, thematic variation, ironic retake, parody, imitation, stylistic theft, pastiches, collages, and deliberate assemblages.[84][85][24][86][87][88] There is no rigorous and precise distinction between practices like imitation, stylistic plagiarism, copy, replica and forgery.[84][89][90][91] These appropriation procedures are the main axis of a literate culture, in which the tradition of the canonic past is being constantly rewritten.[88]

Ruth Graham quotes T. S. Eliot—"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal. Bad poets deface what they take."—she notes that despite the "taboo" of plagiarism, the ill-will and embarrassment it causes in the modern context, readers seem to often forgive the past excesses of historic literary offenders.[92]

Praisings of artistic plagiarism

A passage of Laurence Sterne's 1767 Tristram Shandy condemns plagiarism by resorting to plagiarism.[93] Oliver Goldsmith commented:

Sterne's Writings, in which it is clearly shewn, that he, whose manner and style were so long thought original, was, in fact, the most unhesitating plagiarist who ever cribbed from his predecessors in order to garnish his own pages. It must be owned, at the same time, that Sterne selects the materials of his mosaic work with so much art, places them so well, and polishes them so highly, that in most cases we are disposed to pardon the want of originality, in consideration of the exquisite talent with which the borrowed materials are wrought up into the new form.[94]

In other contexts

On the Internet

Free online tools are becoming available to help identify plagiarism,[95][96] and there are a range of approaches that attempt to limit online copying, such as disabling right clicking and placing warning banners regarding copyrights on web pages. Instances of plagiarism that involve copyright violation may be addressed by the rightful content owners sending a DMCA removal notice to the offending site-owner, or to the ISP that is hosting the offending site. The term "content scraping" has arisen to describe the copying and pasting of information from websites[97] and blogs.[98]

Reverse plagiarism
Further information: Art forgery, Literary forgery, and Pseudepigrapha

Reverse plagiarism, or attribution without copying,[99] refers to falsely giving authorship credit over a work to a person who did not author it, or falsely claiming a source supports an assertion that the source does not make.[100][101] While both the term and activity are relatively rare, incidents of reverse plagiarism do occur typically in similar contexts as traditional plagiarism.[102]

gollark: (I know I just disagree with it)
gollark: What we can't use is a significant square of the world, the tomes already found, and the turtle swarm used, though most people already have their own swarms.
gollark: So Kepler decided to maintain a monopoly on the secret tome data, you see, which is totally good for the consumer and never goes wrong.
gollark: Via bibliocraft.
gollark: You can copy them.

See also

References
  1. From the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary:
    use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work
    qtd. in Stepchyshyn, Vera; Nelson, Robert S. (2007). Library plagiarism policies. Assoc. of College & Resrch Libraries. p. 65. ISBN 978-0-8389-8416-1.
  2. From the Oxford English Dictionary:
    The action or practice of taking someone else's work, idea, etc., and passing it off as one's own; literary theft.
  3. "University bosses call for ban on essay-writing companies". 27 September 2018. Students caught submitting work that is not their own face serious penalties, which can include being thrown off their university course.
  4. "Daily News fires editor after Shaun King accused of plagiarism". 19 April 2016.
  5. "Jeff Koons found guilty of plagiarism over multi-million-pound sculpture". 8 November 2018. The court ordered Mr Koons, his business, and the Pompidou museum - which had exhibited the work in 2014 - to pay Mr Davidovici a total of €135,000 (£118,000) in compensation.
  6. "Fashion designer Galliano fined for copying imagery". 19 April 2007. Fashion designer John Galliano’s company was ordered to pay 200,000 euros ($271,800) in damages to renowned U.S. photographer William Klein
  7. "Polish professor could face three-year sentence for plagiarism". 5 December 2012.
  8. "Ex-VC of DU sent to jail for 'plagiarism', released". 26 November 2014.
  9. O'Connor, Z (2015) Extreme plagiarism: The rise of the e-Idiot?, International Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 20 (1), pp1-11. ISSN 2327-7955
  10. "Why Belgium's plagiarism verdict on Luc Tuymans is beyond parody". 21 January 2015.
  11. "Jeff Koons plagiarised French photographer for Naked sculpture". 9 March 2017.
  12. Osterberg, Eric C. (2003). Substantial similarity in copyright law. Practising Law Institute. p. §1:1, 1–2. ISBN 1-4024-0341-0. With respect to the copying of individual elements, a defendant need not copy the entirety of the plaintiff's copyrighted work to infringe, and he need not copy verbatim.
  13. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1936-01-17). "Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corporation, 81 F.2d 49 (2d Cir. 1936)". No plagiarist can excuse the wrong by showing how much of his work he did not pirate.
  14. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1992-04-02). "Art Rogers, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Jeff Koons Sonnabend Gallery, Inc., Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees, 960 F.2d 301 (2d Cir. 1992)". 960 F.2d 301 Nos. 234, 388 and 235, Dockets 91-7396, 91-7442 and 91-7540. “the copies they produced bettered the price of the copied work by a thousand to one, their piracy of a less well-known artist's work would escape being sullied by an accusation of plagiarism.”.
  15. Lynch (2002)
  16. Green, Stuart P. (2002). "Plagiarism, Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law: Some Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights". Hastings Law Journal. 54 (1). SSRN 315562.
  17. "The Difference Between Copyright Infringement and Plagiarism". 7 October 2013.
  18. "Is Plagiarism Illegal?". www.plagiarism.org. October 27, 2017. Retrieved 2019-10-15.
  19. Introna, Dr. Lucas (2003). Cultural Attitudes Towards Plagiarism. Lancashire England: Lancaster University.
  20. Liu, Xiaojing; Liu, Shijuan; Lee, Seung-hee; Magjuka, Richard J. (2010). "Cultural Differences in Online Learning: International Student Perceptions". Journal of Educational Technology & Society. 13 (3): 177–188. ISSN 1176-3647. JSTOR jeductechsoci.13.3.177.
  21. Valpy, Francis Edward Jackson (2005). Etymological Dictionary of the Latin Language. p. 345. ISBN 9781402173844. entry for plagium, quotation: "the crime of kidnapping."
  22. "Online Etymology Dictionary". Retrieved April 24, 2011.
  23. Newton, Philip M.; Lang, Christopher (1 January 2016). "Custom Essay Writers, Freelancers, and Other Paid Third Parties". In Bretag, Tracey (ed.). Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer Singapore. pp. 249–271. doi:10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_38. ISBN 978-981-287-097-1.
  24. Lands, Robert (1999) Plagiarism is no Crime Archived 2011-01-01 at the Wayback Machine published by The Association of Illustrators (AOI), December 1999. Quotation:
    Plagiarism may be a taboo in academia, but in art is almost essential.
  25. Gabriel, Trip (1 August 2010). "Plagiarism Lines Blur for Students in Digital Age". The New York Times.
  26. Weber-Wulff, Debora (2019-03-27). "Plagiarism detectors are a crutch, and a problem". Nature. 567 (7749): 435. Bibcode:2019Natur.567..435W. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-00893-5. PMID 30918394.
  27. Abigail Lipson & Sheila M. Reindl (July–August 2003). "The Responsible Plagiarist: Understanding Students Who Misuse Sources". About Campus. 8 (3): 7–14. doi:10.1177/108648220300800304.
  28. Grove, Jack (7 August 2014). "Sinister buttocks? Roget would blush at the crafty cheek Middlesex lecturer gets to the bottom of meaningless phrases found while marking essays". Times Higher Education. Retrieved 15 July 2015.
  29. Kroger, Manfred (2010). "Editorial:Some Thoughts on Plagiarism". Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. 9 (3): 259–260. doi:10.1111/j.1541-4337.2010.00113.x.
  30. Susan D. Blum (2010). My Word!: Plagiarism and College Culture. Cornell University Press. ISBN 9780801447631. JSTOR 10.7591/j.ctt7v8sf.
  31. Cully, P. (2013). "Plagiarism Avoidance in Academic Submissions". ARROW@TU Dublib. Dublin Institute of Technology. doi:10.21427/D7KJ7N.
  32. Kock, N (July 1999). "A case of academic plagiarism". Communications of the ACM. 42 (7): 96–104. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.170.1018. doi:10.1145/306549.306594.
  33. Kock, N., Davison, R. (December 2003). "Dealing with plagiarism in the information systems research community: a look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them". MIS Quarterly, 27 (4): 511–32.
  34. Clarke, Roger (2006). "Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems". Journal of the Association for Information Systems. 7 (1): 91–121. doi:10.17705/1jais.00081. ISSN 1536-9323.
  35. "plagiarism Archives – Retraction Watch".
  36. Eaton, S. E. (2017). Comparative Analysis of Institutional Policy Definitions of Plagiarism: A Pan-Canadian University Study. Interchange: A Quarterly Review of Education, 48(3), 271-281. doi:10.1007/s10780-017-9300-7
  37. Gipp, Bela (2014). Citation-based Plagiarism Detection: Detecting Disguised and Cross-language Plagiarism using Citation Pattern Analysis. Springer Vieweg. ISBN 978-3-658-06393-1. p.10
  38. Fishman, Teddi (Sep 28–30, 2009). "We know it when we see it is not good enough: toward a standard definition of plagiarism that transcends theft, fraud, and copyright" (PDF). Proceedings of the 4th Asia Pacific Conference on Educational Integrity. p.5
  39. "What is Plagiarism" Archived 2012-10-26 at the Wayback Machine. Stanford University. 2012-07-27.
  40. "What is Plagiarism? | Poorvu Center for Teaching and Learning".
  41. "Defining and Avoiding Plagiarism: The WPA Statement on Best Practices". Princeton University. 2012-07-27
  42. "Student Honor Code". Emory: Oxford College. 2012-07-27.
  43. "What is plagiarism?". Brown University Library. 2012-07-27
  44. USNA Statements on Plagiarism - Avoiding Plagiarism US Naval Academy, Retrieved April 5, 2017.
  45. "The Plagiarism Spectrum". Turnitin. Retrieved 7 August 2018.
  46. Foltýnek, Tomáš; Meuschke, Norman; Gipp, Bela (2019-10-16). "Academic Plagiarism Detection: A Systematic Literature Review". ACM Computing Surveys. 52 (6): 1–42. doi:10.1145/3345317.
  47. Newton, Philip (2 April 2016). "Academic integrity: a quantitative study of confidence and understanding in students at the start of their higher education" (PDF). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 41 (3): 482–497. doi:10.1080/02602938.2015.1024199.
  48. Tennant, Peter; Rowell, Gill (2009–2010). "Benchmark Plagiarism Tariff" (PDF). plagiarism advice.org. iParadigms Europe. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2014. Retrieved 9 August 2013.
  49. Colella-Sandercock, J. A.; Alahmadi, H. W. (2015). "Plagiarism education: Strategies for instructors". International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research. 13 (1): 76–84.
  50. Sattler, Sebastian; Wiegel, Constantin; Veen, Floris van (2017). "The use frequency of 10 different methods for preventing and detecting academic dishonesty and the factors influencing their use". Studies in Higher Education. 42 (6): 1126–1144. doi:10.1080/03075079.2015.1085007.
  51. Dawes, John (20 July 2018). "Practical Prevention of Plagiarism for University Faculty & Management – 14 Tactics". SSRN. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3209034. SSRN 3209034.
  52. Students warned against using 'essay mill' sites to write dissertations The Guardian
  53. University bosses call for ban on essay-writing companies BBC
  54. Ireland, Chris; Huddersfield, University of; UK; English, John; Huddersfield, University of; UK (1 October 2011). "Let Them Plagiarise: Developing Academic Writing in a Safe Environment". Journal of Academic Writing. 1 (1): 165–172. doi:10.18552/joaw.v1i1.10.
  55. Leung, C. H., & Cheng, S. C. L. (2017). An instructional approach to practical solutions for plagiarism. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(9), 1646-1652. doi:10.13189/ujer.2017.050922
  56. Colella-Sandercock, J. A.; Alahmadi, H. W. (2016). Rethinking Pedagogy: How the Implementation of Transformative Teaching and Learning Can Help Reduce Plagiarism (PDF). 10th Annual International Conference on Teaching and Learning.
  57. Gill Byrne; Chris Ireland (2011). "Using Technology to Prevent Plagiarism: Skilling the Students" (PDF) (Working Paper).
  58. Serviss, Tricia (1 January 2015). "Creating Faculty Development Programming to Prevent Plagiarism: Three Approaches". In Bretag, Tracey Ann (ed.). Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer Singapore. pp. 1–14. doi:10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_73-1. ISBN 9789812870797 – via link.springer.com.
  59. "Cheating university students face FBI-style crackdown". 14 December 2018. A lot of schools don't teach anything about intellectual property rights, don't teach students about plagiarism, so when they come to university they have to be re-educated.
  60. Patrzek, J.; Sattler, S.; van Veen, F.; Grunschel, C.; Fries, S. (2014). "Investigating the Effect of Academic Procrastination on the Frequency and Variety of Academic Misconduct: A Panel Study". Studies in Higher Education. 40 (6): 1–16. doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.854765.
  61. Sebastian Sattler, Peter Graeff, Sebastian Willen: Explaining the Decision to Plagiarize: An Empirical Test of the Interplay Between Rationality, Norms, and Opportunity. In: Deviant Behavior. 34, 2013, S. 444–463, doi:10.1080/01639625.2012.735909.
  62. "Journalism". Famous Plagiarists.com / War On Plagiarism.org. Archived from the original on 26 February 2007. Retrieved 9 August 2013.
  63. Dellavalle, Robert P.; Banks, Marcus A.; Ellis, Jeffrey I. (September 2007). "Frequently asked questions regarding self-plagiarism: How to avoid recycling fraud". Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. 57 (3): 527. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2007.05.018. PMC 2679117. PMID 17707155.
  64. Rebecca Attwood. "Allow me to rephrase, and boost my tally of articles". Times Higher Education. 3 July 2008.
  65. "Plagiarism Policy". Retrieved 4 November 2019.
  66. Hexham, Irving (2005). "The Plague of Plagiarism: Academic Plagiarism Defined". UCalgary.ca.
  67. Roig, M. (2010). Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: What every author should know. Biochemia Medica, 20(3), 295-300. Retrieved from http://www.biochemia-medica.com/content/plagiarism-and-self-plagiarism-what-every-author-should-know
  68. Samuelson, Pamela (August 1994). "Self-plagiarism or fair use?" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 37 (8): 21–5. doi:10.1145/179606.179731.
  69. "Reverse Plagiarism? Or, Did I Say That?". 2007-11-26.
  70. "Frequently Asked Questions".
  71. Roig, M. (2005). "Re-Using Text from One's Own Previously Published Papers: An Exploratory Study of Potential Self-Plagiarism". Psychological Reports. 97 (1): 43–49. doi:10.2466/pr0.97.1.43-49. PMID 16279303.
  72. Roig, M. (2015) [Created in 2003]. "Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing" (PDF).
    "Avoiding Plagiarism, Self-plagiarism, and Other Questionable Writing Practices: A Guide to Ethical Writing". U.S. Department of Health & Human Services: Office of Research Integrity.
  73. Roig, M. (8 January 2015). "On Reusing Our Previously Disseminated Work". American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  74. Broome, M (November 2004). "Self-plagiarism: Oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct?". Nursing Outlook. 52 (6): 273–4. doi:10.1016/j.outlook.2004.10.001. PMID 15614263.
  75. Andreescu, Liviu (November 2012). "Self-Plagiarism in Academic Publishing: The Anatomy of a Misnomer". Science and Engineering Ethics. 19 (3): 775–797. doi:10.1007/s11948-012-9416-1. PMID 23179068.
  76. Bird, SJ (October 2002). "Self-plagiarism and dual and redundant publications: what is the problem? Commentary on 'Seven ways to plagiarize: handling real allegations of research misconduct'". Science and Engineering Ethics. 8 (4): 543–4. doi:10.1007/s11948-002-0007-4. PMID 12501723.
  77. Resnik, David B. (1998). The Ethics of Science: an introduction, London: Routledge. p.177, notes to chapter six, note 3. Online via Google Books
  78. Scanlon, PM (2007). "Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism". Plagiary. 2 (1): 1–11. hdl:2027/spo.5240451.0002.007.
  79. Lorraine Eden. "JIBS Code of Ethics". Journal of International Business Studies. Archived from the original on 2010-07-23. Retrieved 2010-08-02.
  80. "ACM Policy and Procedures on Plagiarism". June 2010.
  81. American Political Science Association (2008). "A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science". Second Edition. Section 21.1. ISBN 1-878147-05-6
  82. American Society for Public Administration. "ASPA's Code of Ethics" Archived 2011-01-24 at the Wayback Machine
  83. "Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct". American Historical Association. 2005-01-06. Retrieved 2009-04-16.
  84. Derrida [1959] quotation: (p.40): "The boundaries between permissible and impermissible, imitation, stylistic plagiarism, copy, replica and forgery remain nebulous."
  85. Eco (1990) p. 95 quotation:
    Each of the types of repetition that we have examined is not limited to the mass media but belongs by right to the entire history of artistic creativity; plagiarism, quotation, parody, the ironic retake are typical of the entire artistic-literary tradition.
    Much art has been and is repetitive. The concept of absolute originality is a contemporary one, born with Romanticism; classical art was in vast measure serial, and the "modern" avant-garde (at the beginning of this century) challenged the Romantic idea of "creation from nothingness," with its techniques of collage, mustachios on the Mona Lisa, art about art, and so on.
  86. Alfrey (2000)
  87. Genette [1982] note 3 to ch. 7, p. 433. quotation:
    "transposition"... all the other possible terms (rewriting, rehandling, remake, revision, refection, recasting, etc.)
  88. Steiner (1998) pp. 437, 459 quotation:
    (p. 437) There is between 'translation proper' and 'transmutation' a vast terrain of 'partial transformation'. The verbal signs in the original message or statement are modified by one of a multitude of means or by a combination of means. These include paraphrase, graphic illustration, pastiche, imitation, thematic variation, parody, citation in a supporting or undermining context, false attribution (accidental or deliberate), plagiarism, collage, and many others. This zone of partial transformation, of derivation, of alternate restatement determines much of our sensibility and literacy. It is, quite simply, the matrix of culture. (p. 459) We could, in some measure, at least, come closer to a verifiable gradation of the sequence of techniques and aims, which leads from literal translation through paraphrases, mimesis, and pastiche to thematic variation. I have suggested that this sequence is the main axis of a literate culture, that a culture advances, spiralwise, via translations of its own canonic past.
  89. Haywood (1987) p.109, quoting Arnau
  90. Eco (1987) p.202, quoting Arnau
  91. Arnau [1959] quotation: (p. 40) "The boundaries between permissible and impermissible, imitation, stylistic plagiarism, copy, replica and forgery remain nebulous."
  92. Graham, Ruth (January 7, 2014). "Word Theft". Poetryfoundation.org. Retrieved 2014-01-09.
  93. Mark Ford Love and Theft London Review of Books Vol. 26 No. 23 · 2 December 2004 pages 34–35 | 4103 words
  94. Oliver Goldsmith The vicar of Wakefield: a tale, Volume 5 p.xviii
  95. "Apple accused of copyright wrongs". Archived from the original on May 10, 2011. Retrieved March 7, 2011.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)
  96. "Copyscape Searches For Scraped Content". WebProNews. Archived from the original on 2007-02-21.
  97. Jones, Del (August 1, 2006). "Authorship gets lost on Web". USA Today.
  98. Welch, Maura (May 8, 2006). "Online plagiarism strikes blog world". The Boston Globe.
  99. ‘Plagiarism, Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law: Some Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights’ (2002-3) 54 Hastings Law Journal 167, 180.
  100. "Academic dishonesty and misconduct: Curbing plagiarism in the Muslim world by Abdul Rashid Moten". Missing or empty |url= (help)
  101. "The Intersection of Copyright Plagiarism and the Monitoring of Student Work by Educational Institutions by Mary Wyburn and John Macphail" (PDF). anzela.edu.au. Retrieved 31 January 2019.
  102. "Reverse Plagiarism? Or, Did I Say That?". 2007-11-26.

Works cited
  • Alfrey, Penelope (2000). "Petrarch's Apes: Originality, Plagiarism and Copyright Principles within Visual Culture". MIT Communications Forum.
  • Arnau, Frank Translation from the German by Brownjohn, J. Maxwell (1961). The Art of the Faker. Little, Brown and Company.
  • Derrida, Jacques, Roudinesco, Élisabeth [2001] (2004) De Quoi Demain, English translation 2004 by Jeff Fort as For what tomorrow—: a dialogue, ch.4 Unforeseeable Freedom
  • Blum, Susan D. My Word!: Plagiarism and College Culture (2010)
  • Eco, Umberto (1987) Fakes and Forgeries in Versus, Issues 46–48, republished in 1990 in The limits of interpretation pp. 174–202
  • Eco, Umberto (1990) Interpreting Serials in The limits of interpretation, pp. 83–100, excerpt; link unavailable
  • Gérard Genette (1982) Palimpsests: literature in the second degree
  • Haywood, Ian (1987) Faking it
  • Hutcheon, Linda (1985). "3. The Pragmatic Range of Parody". A Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. New York: Methuen. ISBN 978-0-252-06938-3.
  • Joachimides, Christos M. and Rosenthal, Norman and Anfam, David and Adams, Brooks (1993) American art in the 20th century: painting and sculpture 1913–1993
  • Lynch, Jack (2002) The Perfectly Acceptable Practice of Literary Theft: Plagiarism, Copyright, and the Eighteenth Century, in Colonial Williamsburg: The Journal of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation 24, no. 4 (Winter 2002–3), pp. 51–54. Also available online since 2006 at Writing World.
  • Paull, Harry Major (1928) Literary ethics: a study in the growth of the literary conscience Part II, ch.X Parody and Burlesque pp. 133–40 (public domain work, author died in 1934)
  • Royal Shakespeare Company (2007) The RSC Shakespeare – William Shakespeare Complete Works, Introduction to the Comedy of Errors
  • Ruthven, K. K. (2001) Faking Literature
  • Spearing, A. C. (1987) Introduction section to Chaucer's The Franklin's Prologue and Tale
  • Spearing, A. C. (1989) Readings in medieval poetry
  • Steiner, George (1998) After Babel, ch.6 Topologies of culture, 3rd revised edition

Further reading

Media related to Plagiarism at Wikimedia Commons

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.