Search

AbstractPublishing scientific articles is an expedition of tenacious efforts with patience and conscientious decision-making; however, even with such careful consideration, researchers may overlook the dubious activities of clandestine organizations or remain oblivious to the unethical aspects of publishing. Paper mills are the latest impediment to academic publishing’s integrity. The increasing number of paper mill publications damages the credibility of genuine journals and jeopardizes academic integrity, adding to the vulnerability of research. This paper deals with the tactics, activity, detection, impact, and solving the menace of such fraudulent practices. This paper is a summary of existing literature and analysis that aims to increase awareness of fraudulent practices like paper mills among researchers and academicians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates retracted articles indexed in the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Brazil, using bibliometric techniques to identify the characteristics of these retractions and relevant citation trends. All records of retracted articles from the first record in October 2004 to April 2022 were included. Sixty-seven retractions and 870 citations pre- and post-retraction were analyzed. Results indicate a change of scenario that began in 2015, with recurrences of retracted articles allegedly produced by paper mills. The prevalence of retractions derived from professional misconduct in health research and the frequency of post-retraction citations in health sciences raise concerns in the chain of stakeholders, public health, and scientific development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To reveal the typical features of text duplication in papers from four medical fields: basic medicine, health management, pharmacology and pharmacy, and public health and preventive medicine. To analyze the reasons for duplication and provide suggestions for the management of medical academic misconduct. In total, 2,469 representative Chinese journal papers were included in our research, which were submitted by researchers in 2020 and 2021. A plagiarism check was carried out using the Academic Misconduct Literature Check System (AMLC). We generated a corrected similarity index based on the AMLC general similarity index for further analysis. We compared the similarity indices of papers in four medical fields and revealed their trends over time; differences in similarity index between review and research articles were also analyzed according to the different fields. Further analysis of 143 papers suspected of plagiarism was also performed from the perspective of sections containing duplication and according to the field of research. Papers in the field of pharmacology and pharmacy had the highest similarity index (8.67 ± 5.92%), which was significantly higher than that in other fields, except health management. The similarity index of review articles (9.77 ± 10.28%) was significantly higher than that of research articles (7.41 ± 6.26%). In total, 143 papers were suspected of plagiarism (5.80%) with similarity indices ≥ 15%; most were papers on health management (78, 54.55%), followed by public health and preventive medicine (38, 26.58%); 90.21% of the 143 papers had duplication in multiple sections, while only 9.79% had duplication in a single section. The distribution of sections with duplication varied among different fields; papers in pharmacology and pharmacy were more likely to have duplication in the data/methods and introduction/background sections, however, papers in health management were more likely to contain duplication in the introduction/background or results/discussion sections. Different structures for papers in different fields may have caused these differences. There were three limitations to our research. Firstly, we observed that a small number of papers have been checked early. It is unknown who conducted the plagiarism check as this can be included in other evaluations, such as applications for Science and technology projects or awards. If the authors carried out the check, text with high similarity indices may have been excluded before submission, meaning the similarity index in our research may have been lower than the original value. Secondly, there were only four medical fields included in our research. Additional analysis on a wider scale is required in the future. Thirdly, only a general similarity index was calculated in our study; other similarity indices were not tested. A comprehensive analysis of similarity indices in four medical fields was performed. We made several recommendations for the supervision of medical academic misconduct and the formation of criteria for defining suspected plagiarism for medical papers, as well as for the improved accuracy of text duplication checks. We quantified the differences between the AMLC general similarity index and the corrected index, described the situation around text duplication and plagiarism in papers from four medical fields, and revealed differences in similarity indices between different article types. We also revealed differences in the sections containing duplication for papers with suspected plagiarism among different fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retracted articles by Indian scholars have received significant attention in recent times. However, no comprehensive study has been conducted to analyse the citations of retracted papers authored by Indian researchers. This study aimed to assess the citations to retracted works published between 2001 and 2020 pre‐ and post‐retraction. The study found that there was an increase in retractions over time, with empirical data suggesting that the number of retractions has increased significantly, from 72 papers between 2001 and 2010 to 365 papers between 2011 and 2020. Duplication (n = 128) and plagiarism (n = 119) were the primary reasons for retraction. Notably, 90% of the retracted articles continued to receive citations after retraction. Among the retracted papers, eight received more than 50 post‐retraction citations, 39 received 20 to 50 citations, 347 received one to 19 citations, and 43 were not cited at all post‐retraction. There was an overall 8% decrease in citations after retraction. Retractions were observed across journals of varying impact factor, with a higher number of retractions observed in journals with an impact factor of less than 5 (n = 286; 65%). Furthermore, smaller research teams of two to five authors accounted for 72% of the total retractions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Paper mills" are unethical outsourcing agencies proficient in fabricating fraudulent manuscripts submitted to scholarly journals. In earlier years, the activity of such companies involved plagiarism, but their processes have gained complexity, involving the fabrication of images and fake results. The objective of this study is to examine the main features of retracted paper mills' articles registered in the Retraction Watch database, from inception to the present, analyzing the number of articles per year, their number of citations, and their authorship network. Eligibility criteria for inclusion: retracted articles in any language due to paper mill activity. Retraction letters, notes, and notices, for exclusion. We collected the associated citations and the journals' impact factors of the retracted papers from Web of Science (Clarivate) and performed a data network analysis using VOSviewer software. This scoping review complies with PRISMA 2020 statement and main extensions. After a thorough analysis of the data, we identified 325 retracted articles due to suspected operations published in 31 journals (with a mean impact factor of 3.1). These retractions have produced 3708 citations. Nearly all retracted papers have come from China. Journal's impact factor lower than 7, life sciences journals, cancer, and molecular biology topics were common among retracted studies. The rapid increase of retractions is highly challenging. Paper mills damage scientific research integrity, exacerbating fraud, plagiarism, fake images, and simulated results. Rheumatologists should be fully aware of this growing phenomenon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper shares results from a pedagogical experiment that assigns undergraduates to "cheat" on a final class essay by requiring their use of text-generating AI software. For this assignment, students harvested content from an installation of GPT-2, then wove that content into their final essay. At the end, students offered a "revealed" version of the essay as well as their own reflections on the experiment. In this assignment, students were specifically asked to confront the oncoming availability of AI as a writing tool. What are the ethics of using AI this way? What counts as plagiarism? What are the conditions, if any, we should place on AI assistance for student writing? And how might working with AI change the way we think about writing, authenticity, and creativity? While students (and sometimes GPT-2) offered thoughtful reflections on these initial questions, actually composing with GPT-2 opened their perspectives more broadly on the ethics and practice of writing with AI. In this paper, I share how students experienced those issues, connect their insights to broader conversations in the humanities about writing and communication, and explain their relevance for the ethical use and evaluation of language models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Web‐based references form an integral part of academic culture and literature, as well as scientific communication.The preservation of web‐based references that are cited in‐text or in reference lists of academic papers is essential to ensure the integrity of knowledge preservation.When access or links to web‐based resources and references disappear, or if they are dysfunctional, these phenomena are collectively referred to as reference rot.Even though reference rot degrades the integrity of information in academic papers, no industry‐wide solutions currently exist.Given its prominence, we propose the Internet Archive as a possible solution to address reference rot, but also note its weaknesses and limitations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Detecting plagiarism in academic papers is crucial for maintaining academic integrity, preserving the originality of published work, and safeguarding intellectual property. While existing applications excel at text plagiarism detection, they fall short when it comes to image plagiarism. This paper introduces a novel algorithm, named "VIBRANT-WALK," designed to detect image plagiarism in academic manuscripts. The challenge of identifying plagiarized images is formidable, requiring a unique approach. Traditional Computer Vision algorithms, proficient in image similarity tasks, face limitations in determining whether an image has been previously used in an article. To address this, the proposed algorithm leverages a repository of all published article pages, focusing on absolute identicality rather than image similarity. The algorithm comprises two stages. In the first stage, a "Vibrancy Matrix" is created through image preprocessing, aiding in contour determination. The second stage involves pixel-by-pixel comparison with images from published manuscripts. To enhance efficiency, the algorithm initiates comparisons from the pixel with the highest score in the Vibrancy Matrix, followed by pixel comparisons through random walks, significantly reducing complexity. To conduct the study, a custom dataset was compiled from 69 research articles, capturing snapshots of each page and figure. Overall, we present 485 unique test cases where we can test the accuracy and efficiency of the algorithm. The lack of publicly available datasets necessitated this approach. The proposed algorithm outperformed the existing models and algorithms in this field by achieving an overall accuracy of 94.8% on the collated dataset, identifying 460 instances of plagiarism out of the 485 test cases. The algorithm also demonstrated a 100% accuracy rate in avoiding false positives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the publication "Typifications, new combinations and new synonyms in Indian Impatiens (Balsaminaceae)" by Singh, R. K. et al. (2021), the authors used pseudoscientific theoretical background, utilized material collected by other persons without citing the source of data in support of their claims, and made serious errors in the determination and delimitation of Impatiens taxa occuring in Himalayas and adjacent areas. They proposed new combinations and statuses without sufficient field and literature studies and failed to show convincing evidences in their treatments. Their documentation lacks important details, like authorship of the published pictures, locations and dates of pictures, or measurements of plant parts; the whole documentation has geographically biased gaps – in case of Western Himalayan or Sikkimese taxa, there is almost no original illustrative material. Finally, they falsely claimed extensive field studies in Western Himalaya. This paper reinstates 19 species and 1 variety synonymised by Singh et al. (2021) with scientific evidences based on illustrations from types and colour photographs from fresh collections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retractions of scientific papers published by some Iran-affiliated scientists in the preceding decade have attracted much attention and publicity; however, the reasons for these retractions have not been documented. We searched the Retraction Watch Database to enumerate the retracted Iran-affiliated papers from December 2001 to December 2019 and aimed to outline the predominant reasons for retractions. The reasons included fake peer-review, authorship dispute, fabricated data, plagiarism, conflict of interest, erroneous data, and duplication. The Fisher's exact test was used to investigate the associations between retractions and their underlying reasons. We selected P < 0.05 to indicate the statistically significant differences. We found 697 retracted papers. Duplication (27%), plagiarism (26%), and fake peer-review (21%) were the most frequent reasons for retractions. Our study highlights the importance of urgent intervention to prevent the misconduct and questionable research practices that lead to retractions in Iran. Continually educating the scientists and postgraduate students about the ethics and norms of scientific publishing is an important measure to ensure publication of reliable, worthy, and impactful papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To provide an overview of retractions of research papers contributed by authors from the Arab region. Method: Papers in which the first author was affiliated to an Arabian country were selected from the Retraction Watch database covering the period 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2018. The retrieved records were divided into nine categories based on the reasons for retraction. Results: The search yielded 322 retractions, and the most frequent reason for retraction was plagiarism (34.5%). The median time from publication to retraction was 14 (25%-75% percentile 5-30) months. The number of papers retracted each year as well as the number of papers published in a given year but subsequently retracted increased steadily over the 21 years. The proportion of retracted papers to the total number of published papers (0.17%) was higher than the global proportion and was the highest for Algeria (1%) and the lowest for Lebanon (0.03%). Of the countries within the Arab region, 12 out of 14 countries showed either plagiarism or duplication as the most common reason for retraction; however, the countries differed in terms of the number of retractions and the time from publishing to retraction. Conclusion: Plagiarism was the most common cause of retraction in the Arab countries. The increase in the number of papers retracted each year was probably because searches now extend farther in the past, whereas the increase in the number of papers published in a given year but subsequently retracted can be attributed to the overall increase in the number of papers published. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the landscape of academic research and citation practices, the emergence of ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence language model developed by OpenAI, represents a transformative leap forward. This paper delves into the multifaceted role of ChatGPT in revolutionizing scholarly endeavors beyond mere plagiarism detection. We explore how ChatGPT facilitates research collaboration, streamlines literature reviews, and assists in proper citation practices. By harnessing ChatGPT's contextual understanding and vast knowledge repository, social work researchers can unlock new avenues of creativity and efficiency in knowledge acquisition and dissemination. Moreover, this paper discusses the ethical considerations surrounding the integration of AI in academia and underscores the need for guidelines and education to ensure responsible usage. Ultimately, ChatGPT stands at the forefront of a technological revolution, empowering social work researchers to push the boundaries of knowledge acquisition and dissemination in unprecedented ways. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article criticizes against the rhetoric of online paper mills. The purchase of essays from paper mill Web sites is described. The idea that students cannot reject plagiarism is denounced. A classroom-based response to the point of writerly no return faced with options such as the paper mills is posed.

Many philosophers have argued that large language models (LLMs) subvert the traditional undergraduate philosophy paper. For the enthusiastic, LLMs merely subvert the traditional idea that students ought to write philosophy papers "entirely on their own." For the more pessimistic, LLMs merely facilitate plagiarism. We believe that these controversies neglect a more basic crisis. We argue that, because one can, with minimal philosophical effort, use LLMs to produce outputs that at least "look like" good papers, many students will complete paper assignments in a way that fails to develop their philosophical abilities. We argue that this problem exists even if students can produce better papers with AI and even if instructors can detect AI-generated content with decent reliability. But LLMs also create a pedagogical opportunity. We propose that instructors shift the emphasis of their assignments from philosophy papers to "LLM dialogues": philosophical conversations between the student and an LLM. We describe our experience with using these types of assignments over the past several semesters. We argue that, far from undermining quality philosophical instruction, LLMs allow us to teach philosophy more effectively than was possible before. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic integrity refers to the concept of ensuring moral standards and ethics in academia. The commitment and demonstration of moral values like honesty, trust and fair dealing in academic settings and contexts are the fundamentals of academic integrity. The International Center of Academic Integrity (ICAI) sets out five values to define academic integrity including honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage. This is a fact that higher levels of academic integrity consequently lead towards better academic standards and refinement of academic quality at higher education institutions (HEIs). The paper entails a qualitative approach and is based upon the past pertinent studies as well as the personal experiences of the authors in academia to discuss and evaluate the academic integrity in the context of Pakistani HEIs. The actions and practices which violate academic integrity constitute academic misconduct and adamic dishonesty. The malpractices may be done at the end of students, faculty or institutional authorities and HEIs administration. This paper discusses the problems and issues which undermine the academic integrity in HEIs encompassing the major issues including plagiarism, cheating in exams, contract cheating, collusion, facilitation and deceit among others. The paper also proposes the ways to address the issues of academic misconduct by suggesting measures and recommendations to curb the aspects of academic dishonesty by the students, faculty members and HEIs administrative staff. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of artificial intelligence in academia is a hot topic in the education field. ChatGPT is an AI tool that offers a range of benefits, including increased student engagement, collaboration, and accessibility. However, is also raises concerns regarding academic honesty and plagiarism. This paper examines the opportunities and challenges of using ChatGPT in higher education, and discusses the potential risks and rewards of these tools. The paper also considers the difficulties of detecting and preventing academic dishonesty, and suggests strategies that universities can adopt to ensure ethical and responsible use of these tools. These strategies include developing policies and procedures, providing training and support, and using various methods to detect and prevent cheating. The paper concludes that while the use of AI in higher education presents both opportunities and challenges, universities can effectively address these concerns by taking a proactive and ethical approach to the use of these tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When a journal receives a duplicate publication, the ability to identify the submitted work as previously published, and reject it, is an assay to publication ethics best practices. The aim of this study was to evaluate how three different types of journals, namely open access (OA) journals, subscription-based journals, and presumed predatory journals, responded to receiving a previously published manuscript for review.Methods: We performed a quasi-experimental study in which we submitted a previously published article to a random sample of 602 biomedical journals, roughly 200 journals from each journal type sampled: OA journals, subscription-based journals, and presumed predatory journals. Three hundred and three journals received a Word version in manuscript format, while 299 journals received the formatted publisher's PDF version of the published article. We then recorded responses to the submission received after approximately 1 month. Responses were reviewed, extracted, and coded in duplicate. Our primary outcome was the rate of rejection of the two types of submitted articles (PDF vs Word) within our three journal types.Results: We received correspondence back from 308 (51.1%) journals within our study timeline (32 days); (N = 46 predatory journals, N = 127 OA journals, N = 135 subscription-based journals). Of the journals that responded, 153 received the Word version of the paper, while 155 received the PDF version. Four journals (1.3%) accepted our paper, 291 (94.5%) journals rejected the paper, and 13 (4.2%) requested a revision. A chi-square test looking at journal type, and submission type, was significant (χ2 (4) = 23.50, p < 0.001). All four responses to accept our article came from presumed predatory journals, 3 of which received the Word format and 1 that received the PDF format. Less than half of journals that rejected our submissions did so because they identified ethical issues such as plagiarism with the manuscript (133 (45.7%)).Conclusion: Few journals accepted our submitted paper. However, our findings suggest that all three types of journals may not have adequate safeguards in place to recognize and act on plagiarism or duplicate submissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This note first describes the details of an interesting incident of plagiarism where the author of a previously published paper was sent a verbatim copy of that paper for his review for possible publication in another journal. It then offers a few insights into the possible reasons underlying such blatant plagiarism attempts, and provides caveats against them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: One of the most important ethical challenges in research and academic writing is the scientific misconduct which is defined as violation of scientific regulations. The aim of this study was to review scientific misconduct as an unethical phenomenon. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted by using narrative review strategy in which a total of 56 papers was selected via search in databases such as PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, Elsevier, and Iranian National Medical Digital Library (INMDL) according to the objective of the study. Results: First, we overlooked on scientific misconduct, meaning of plagiarism, the causes of plagiarism, its category, and penalties for plagiarism. The results showed that there is main three type of scientific misconduct including falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism which the latter is the most comment. We found fourteen type of plagiarism according to the literature review. Then, some online and offline software for detection of plagiarism cases were proposed. Finally, some practical strategies presented for prevention of plagiarism. Conclusion: We conclude that using another's idea without appropriate acknowledging is considered as plagiarism which could have negative consequences and punishment for the perpetrator. Familiarization of researchers with cases of plagiarism and their commitment on ethical regulations and correctly acknowledgment of references and using software could be helpful in preventing this problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retracted publications are the scholarly articles that have been withdrawn from publication by authors or journals due to errors, misconduct, or ethical concerns. The present study aims to identify and analyse retracted papers by Indian authors. The data was extracted from the Scopus and also checked from the Retraction Watch database along with the journal's website. The extracted data was analysed using MS Excel, Jamovi, and SPSS-21. The study examined the year-wise retraction rate, reasons for retraction, authorship patterns, time lag for retraction, and impact on citations after retraction. The results showed that while the number of retracted publications per year increased over time, the rate of retraction per 10K publications remained constant. Duplicate publication and plagiarism were the most common reasons for retraction. Approximately one-third of the publications were retracted within six months, and the retraction time decreased over the years, especially in open-access journals. The average number of citations per paper per year before and after retraction were nearly similar. This study could assist librarians and researchers in understanding retractions, avoiding their use, and being cautious when referencing them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Document similarity recognition is one of the most important problems in natural language processing. This paper proposes a plagiarism comparison mechanism called JCF. Initially, the TF–IDF scheme is applied to build a bag of words as the representation of the common features of all documents. Then, the plagiarism comparison is carried out in a coarse-grained manner, which speeds up the similarity comparison. Finally, the most similar documents can then be compared in detail based on a fine-grained approach. In addition, the JCF detects plagiarism at both syntax level and semantic-like level. To prevent the distortion of similarity comparison, this paper further develops a similarity restoration approach such that the proposed JCF can obtain both advantages of quickness and accuracy. Performance studies confirm that the proposed JCF outperforms existing studies in terms of precision, recall and F1 score. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This satellite symposium was the fourth in a series for editors, publishers, reviewers and all those with an interest in scientific publishing. It was held on Wednesday 25th June 2014 at the IADR International meeting in Cape Town, South Africa. The symposium attracted more than 180 attendees. This symposium placed an emphasis on how the quality of papers submitted to dental journals could be improved. The panel included representation from editors, researchers and publishers from North America, India and the Gulf States. The symposium identified a number of challenges for editors and publishers, including the poor quality of many papers submitted to dental and other scientific journals, plagiarism, attempted duplicate publication and sometimes fraudulent results. Where possible speakers are identified by name. A subsequent symposium was held during the IADR meeting in Boston on March 11th 2015. Involvement open to editors, associate editors, publishers and others with an interest in scientific publishing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is the first of a series whose aim is to respond the paper 'Scientific integrity in the digital age: data fabrication, published in Research on Chemical Intermediates, DOI ' by Khaled, and four related papers by the same author. The validity of the experimental findings with typical straight lines passing through the origin is discussed. This part presents clear-cut evidence from the literature that the variation of weight loss with time, constructed during corrosion and corrosion control research studies, yields typical straight lines passing through the origin, depending on the solubility of the corrosion products. This part also raises, and at the same time answers, the question: 'are experimental results with typical straight lines passing through the origin necessarily referring to data fabrication?' [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research has been the core issue in the developmental processes. The research always contributed to the conclusions as to how a particular problem be indentified and so as to its solution. The research has been backed-up by the academics at large. This paper tried to put light on the recent scenario as how much accord the research is being getting from the academics. The paper analyses the recent trends in the academic and non-academic research activities. The research is the result of critical abilities of analytics imbibed in oneself. The academics have the ability required. It is suggested that the role of academics should be enlarged as far as research related tasks are considered. The academic institutions should allocate their respective resources for the research promotion and development related undertaking amongst their people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In papers in areas such as engineering and the physical sciences, figures, tables and formulae are the basic elements to communicate the authors' core ideas, workings and results. As a computational text-matching tool, CrossCheck cannot work on these non-textual elements to detect plagiarism. Consequently, when comparing engineering or physical sciences papers, CrossCheck may return a low similarity index even when plagiarism has in fact taken place. A case of demonstrated plagiarism involving engineering papers with a low similarity index is discussed, and editor's experiences and suggestions are given on how to tackle this problem. The case shows a lack of understanding of plagiarism by some authors or editors, and illustrates the difficulty of getting some editors and publishers to take appropriate action. Consequently, authors, journal editors, and reviewers, as well as research institutions all are duty-bound not only to recognize the differences between ethical and unethical behavior in order to protect a healthy research environment, and also to maintain consistent ethical publishing standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic dishonesty is a serious and increasing problem in higher education. The authors describe a procedure to store, sort, and search student research papers submitted via e-mail. The objective of the research paper database is to assist in creating an educational climate promoting high academic honesty. Procedures were noted documenting the convenience and efficiency in identifying student papers warranting further scrutiny for originality. A small random sample of student research papers submitted for course credit in previous semesters was evaluated for originality of content. Results suggest that the database has value in discouraging some forms of academic dishonesty. The database provides a measure of certainty in detecting instances of academic dishonesty such as a cut and paste from a website or submitting a paper that was submitted in a previous semester. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research integrity is now one of the most important issues in the governance of science and technology (S&T) ethics in China. Many research results have been produced in the academic circle on this topic. A series of regulations and normative documents has been issued by government authorities, and numerous measures have been taken by universities and scientific research institutions. Despite this notable progress, the problems of research integrity have not been eradicated. Incidents such as rejections of papers by journals due to plagiarism and falsification of research results happen from time to time. Also, the awareness of research integrity among some S&T personnel and students has yet to be strengthened. The new challenge for research integrity in the new era is that of being able to locate the deep-seated causes of research-integrity problems and find effective ways to solve them. Exploring the causes of and countermeasures against those problems from the perspective of the culture of science is a research field that deserves greater attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractThis essay concerns the pervasive “problem” of plagiarism in student writing, arguing against the easy adoption of technological policing “solutions” that may themselves contribute to an erosion of authentic learning and knowledge production. The paper critically examines the key tool, or weapon, in the war against plagiarism, namely the educational software Turnitin, and some of the discontent that has arisen in consequence of its widespread adoption in academic institutions. The second part of the essay examines practices of literary plagiarism, using the example of Shakespeare and Coetzee to question notions of originality. Both writers, one from the Renaissance, the other from contemporary literature, will serve as illustrative bookends for the English literary canon as a whole, exemplifying the close relationship between copying and creativity. These ideas are applied to the concept of a “knowledge commons,” which is indispensable to the idea of a good university, and which is being crowded out by inflated discourses of plagiarism and an overreach of plagiarism policing in the academy. Lastly, the essay briefly offers a few practical and pedagogic observations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The apostolic missionary Pedro Cubero (c. 1645-c. 1701) is well known for his journey around the globe by heading East. Cubero exploited this journey in a significant number of publications, including his Peregrinación del mundo (1682). Cubero also expanded his literary career with other subjects unrelated to his travels in books that combine historical and geographical content. However, these works are notable for their tendency toward literary theft. Cubero used the knowledge of several unpublished or barely-known texts to increase his written output with several counterfeit volumes. In this paper I intend to analyze one of these plagiarisms committed by Cubero in a specific work: Descripción general del mundo (1697). This text is an irregular mixture of topographical and chronological information due to the use and abuse of sources by the apostolic missionary. In short, I seek to trace Cubero's different strategies to appropriate other people's texts and, above all, to try to mask this practice. Finally, I will try to explain Cubero's plagiarism in relation to his cultural milieu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors, a chemistry professor and a librarian, used a qualitative survey to assess student perceptions of a Wikipedia editing assignment that they included in a large upper-level biochemistry course. The assignment was initially intended as a public-facing alternative to a short research paper, emphasizing information literacy and scientific literacy. The goal of the survey was to use the results to enhance the assignment. The results of the survey and research for the literature review inspired a novel approach to the assignment using the perspective of metaliteracy. This approach encourages students to think critically about their role as scholars in a participatory environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The introduction of ChatGPT 3.5 in November 2022 ignited a sensation in the academic community, leaving many astounded by its capabilities. This new release more closely emulates human responses than its predecessors. Among its remarkable capabilities, it can answer questions, catalog items in MARC21, recommend reading lists, and make suggestions on a wide array of topics. To assess ChatGPT’s efficacy in aiding library users, the authors of this paper conducted an experiment comparing ChatGPT’s performance with that of librarians in answering reference questions. Thirty questions were randomly selected from the transaction log of the reference inquiries between June 1, 2023 to July 31, 2023 at the Rider University Libraries. These queries constituted 34% of the total user questions during this two-month period. The authors compared the answers by ChatGPT and those by reference librarians for their accuracy, relevance, and friendliness. The findings indicate that reference librarians markedly outperformed their robotic counterpart. An evident issue arises from ChatGPT’s deficiency in understanding local policies and practices. This consequently hinders its ability to provide satisfactory answers in those areas. OpenAI posits that ChatGPT’s proficiency can be enhanced through targeted fine-tuning using locally specific information. At the moment, ChatGPT remains a great tool for librarians. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study presents an exploration into the application of the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT 3.5 in the context of two Hispanic literature survey courses at the University of Delaware during the spring 2023 semester. The introduction of ChatGPT into these learning environments aimed to address two key challenges in teaching Spanish and Latin American literature: falling enrollment rates and rising instances of plagiarism. ChatGPT’s role was twopronged: it served as a component of in-class discussions and a resource for final papers. A total of twenty-one students participated in a follow-up survey designed to gauge their perceptions of ChatGPT as an innovative learning tool. The outcome revealed mixed, yet promising, responses to the use of AI technology in a literature classroom. The data suggest that the ongoing incorporation of cutting-edge tools like ChatGPT into literature courses holds the potential to captivate a diverse group of students and increase enrollment. In addition, the data collected, along with the professor’s analysis of final papers, indicate that ChatGPT can be effective in curbing plagiarism. Responsible AI utilization is becoming increasingly vital in various job markets, and integrating such skills into curricula from STEM to Humanities is crucial for our students’ future career success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The purpose of this study is to present a comprehensive overview of the ethical issues and the processes involved in research and publishing in India. The study examines the present ethical norms, guidelines, frameworks and developments in India, providing insights into the nation's current status of research and recommendations for publication. This document will be a useful starting point and reference document for those embarking on research and publication in Orthopaedics in India. Materials: A survey of the literature was done, which included scholarly papers, reports, rules, and policies pertaining to Indian publishing norms and research ethics. the document starts with a general introduction to ethics, followed by the evolution of ethics in research and the current International as well as Indian codes of ethics. Subsequently, the discussion is divided into two broad headings of ethics in research and ethics in publishing. Under each heading, there are many specific areas in orthopaedics that would require the application of a unique set of ethics. These areas are discussed separately as subheadings. Results and Discussion: The review draws attention to the complexity of ethical issues in Indian and international research and publishing in orthopaedics. Where available, specific guidelines about the topic in India or international guidelines are discussed. The importance of informed consent, data integrity, plagiarism, authorship disputes, and conflicts of interest are only a few of the key results. It is obvious that ethical norms and regulations, such as those offered by the University Grants Commission (UGC), the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), and the Council of Publication Ethics (COPE) are crucial in determining how research is conducted and how papers are published. The types of studies discussed include research in humans and animals, research with stem cells, metal implants and devices, orthobiologics, Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, computer modelling, virtual reality, 3D printing and bioprinting, tissue banking and data management. The roles of different personnel in research and publications are discussed. Conclusions: Ethics in research and publishing play a crucial role in establishing the authority and standard of scholarly work in India. This study underlines the key concepts of ethics that guide various types of studies and the publication process. It also highlights the requirement for frameworks and guidelines for certain unique areas of research in orthopaedics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused drastic changes in the publishing framework which allowed for the quick review and rapid publication of manuscripts in order to quickly share vital information about this new viral pandemic to the general public and scientists. Alarms have been raised for the potential for misconduct in COVID-19 research. The purpose of this study is to determine the presence of plagiarism in COVID-19 papers across infectious disease journals. Methods: COVID-19 related research and review articles published in infectious disease journals were collected. Each manuscript was optimized and uploaded to Turnitin, which is a similarity checking tool. Similarity reports were manually checked for events of true plagiarism using an 80% threshold, performed via human judgment. Results: In this cross-sectional study, 41.61% (n = 129) of manuscripts were deemed plagiarized out of a total of 310 papers that were analyzed. Plagiarism was identified in 35.07% of reviews (n = 47), and 46.6% of original research (n = 82). Among the plagiarized papers, the median number of copied sentences was 3 IQR 4. The highest recorded similarity report was 60%, and the highest number of copied sentences was 85. The discussion section of these articles was the most problematic area, with the average number of copied sentences in that section being 6.25 ± 10.16. The average time to judge all manuscripts was 2.45 ± 3.09 min. Among all the plagiarized papers, 72.09% belonged to papers where the similarity report was ≤ 15% (n = 93). No significant differences were found with regards to plagiarism events among the quartiles. Conclusions: Plagiarism is prevalent in COVID-19 publications. All similarity reports should be supplemented with human judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, Tony Iantosca situates the academic integrity policies of US colleges and universities, as well as student plagiarism, in biopolitical frameworks. By examining the aporias that result from student plagiarism in the context of neoliberal knowledge production, which produces and depends upon individualized, skills‐bearing students, Iantosca interrogates what educators can learn philosophically and pedagogically from the mutual misrecognition that occurs between institutional policy and the transgressing student. He frames this discussion with Michel Foucault's classic work on biopolitics as well as Roberto Esposito's immunitary paradigm in order to examine the implications of student illegibility for what Bernard Stiegler has called education's trans‐individuating potential. The argument that emerges is that student plagiarism has multiple, contradictory significances that can nonetheless teach educators important lessons about property and individualism, and these lessons must be retained as we reinitiate, rather than punish, plagiarizing students. Iantosca then closes the paper with a brief consideration of the pedagogical implications of this argument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been assumed sometimes that plagiarism is traditionally accepted in Confucian-heritage cultures such as China. In this paper we provide evidence to counter such a view. Focusing on a corpus of editorial statements on plagiarism cases published in Chinese journals in the decade of the early 1950s-the early 1960s, we present an integrated genre analysis and discourse analysis of this data. We illuminate 12 rhetorical move types in the focal genre and intertextual links between the genre and two related genres (readers' disclosure reports and plagiarizers' apologies) and demonstrate how plagiarism is construed as a transgressive practice and is imbued with the post-revolutionary Communist discourse of its historical period. The implications of the study apply to the academic community in terms of teaching and learning, on the one hand, and publication practices, on the other. We end the paper by emphasizing the importance of employing a contextualized approach to the study of plagiarism and the power of a triangulated genre and discourse analytic approach in the case of both the present research and the investigation of language use in the real-world more generally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conference proceedings are one of the most important forms of communication for computer scientists. This study investigated the policies of a large number of computer science journals with regard to the republication of papers which had already appeared in conference proceedings. Nearly one-quarter of journal editors would not republish such papers other than in special circumstances (such as a special conference issue), and almost all of the remainder would do so only after substantial updating and expansion of the original paper. Many specified the amount of content that should be new: 30% was the proportion most frequently mentioned. Thus, many sections of text may be identical to the original paper. However, some journal editors do not appear to consider this self-plagiarism provided the original publication is properly cited. Nevertheless, such (re)publication is likely to lead to high similarity scores in CrossCheck; in this field, therefore, journal editors need to exercise particular discretion when evaluating CrossCheck results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explains some developmental stages of a scientific and professional article, the formal requirements that it must satisfy in order to be published, its evaluation and the potential benefit that the author may have from publishing it. It deals with a scientific journal as a medium that has detailed instructions for writing texts, clear structure, established dynamics of publishing, classification of quality, impact factor according to which the ranking lists are being formed. The concept of scientific and professional article is also a subject of interest within this topic. The text is limited to articles intended for scientific and professional journals in the field of library and information science. When it comes to librarianship as a young scientific discipline, scientific journals, being media of communication within the community and observation of new trends in the profession, contribute significantly to the increase of its reputation by bringing better and more comprehensive articles. It is necessary to encourage creation of new scientific journals, and to encourage the existing ones to make additional efforts to define the fields of their interests more precisely, to establish the necessary rules and consistently take care of them being obeyed, so they could meet the requirements for obtaining at least the status of scientific journals. In this way, authors/ librarians would be given greater choice of quality media in order to address the scientific and professional community. On the other hand, in order to improve their scientific and professional reputation, scientific journals need a large number of high quality papers so that editors could choose the ones based on which they could aspire to a better status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Every year the students and teachers experience the same problems in writing academic papers and dissertation thesis, even these work require to follow the same reproducible steps and stages: choosing a subject, collecting of scientific material, analyzing, interpreting, comparing of information and then writing, editing, identifying the mistakes and inadvertences, changing and correcting, finalizing the paper, preparing the oral presentation. The paper is a detailed analyse focused on designing a web site aimed to improve the process of academic writing, students' self-assessment and teachers' objective evaluation, and to increase the quality of teaching act. Developing an institutional repository with all the papers and academic work (license diplomas, master dissertations and doctoral dissertations) could represent to coagulate all efforts with the specific target of quality improving. In the same time using intranet and university platform for managing the development of thesis could be a good opportunity for increasing the quality of teaching system in university, including the analyses of plagiarism possibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A preliminary, two-part study explored the extent to which authors reuse portions of their own text from previously published papers. All 9 articles from a recent issue of a psychology journal were selected as target papers. Up to 3 of the most recent references cited in each of the target articles and written by the same authors were also obtained. All target articles and their corresponding references were stored digitally. Then, using specialized software, each reference was compared to its target article to assess the number of strings of text identical to both papers. Only one of the nine target articles reused significant amounts of text from one of its references. To explore further the possibility of additional text reuse, the references in each of the 9 sets of papers were compared against each other. The new comparison identified 5 pairs of papers with a substantial number of identical strings of text of 6 consecutive words in length or longer, but most of the reused text was confined to the Method section. The results suggest that some of these authors reuse their own text with some frequency, but this was largely confined to complex methodological descriptions of a research design and procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents information on the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) method, an alternative to teaching the research paper. Problems with a traditional research paper; Difference between research papers and the FAQ; Benefits of the FAQ technique in addressing plagiarism.

In our present communication we prove the allegation that Indian authors plagarized the major parts and conclusions of our paper published in 1997 and used them in their paper published in this journal in 2000. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an overview of narratives which college students wrote to discuss their experiences of locating, evaluating, and using information in the context of academic research and to discuss the challenges of writing research papers. A discussion of an analysis which was conducted on the narratives to demonstrate how they enhance the understanding of the college research experience and enable students to raise relevant questions in the classroom is presented.

The article discusses the issue of continued citation of scientific articles that are retracted due to honest mistakes or scientific misconduct such as plagiarism and fabrication or falsification of research data. The citation of the retracted papers will lead to spread misinformation in the scientific literature.

The article suggests that additional procedures must be standardized and implemented when using computer-based examinations. Topics discussed include the similarity in the creation, delivery and proctoring of computer-based and paper-based testing as well as the importance of testing environments ensuring academic integrity without implying student mistrust. Also mentioned are suggestions for proctoring computer-based tests and administrators providing proctors with a proctoring guide.

A literary criticism of the novel "The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club" by Charles Dickens is presented. Topics include publications plagiarizing the novel such as "The Penny Pickwick" by Edward Lloyd, the character Samuel Pickwick, representations of his past and future, and anti-Semitism. Also discussed are prejudice against Jews, racism, ethnic humor, adultery, and human sexuality.