Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

When writing journal articles, science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) researchers produce a number of other genres such as grant proposals and conference posters, and their new articles routinely build directly on their own prior work. As a result, STEM authors often reuse material from their completed documents in producing new documents. While this practice, known as text recycling (or self-plagiarism), is a debated issue in publishing and research ethics, little is known about researchers’ beliefs about what constitutes appropriate practice. This article presents results of from an exploratory, survey-based study on beliefs and attitudes toward text recycling among STEM “experts” (faculty researchers) and “novices” (graduate students and post docs). While expert and novice researchers are fairly consistent in distinguishing between text recycling and plagiarism, there is considerable disagreement about appropriate text recycling practice.

Keywords

text recycling plagiarism self-plagiarism publication ethics STEM

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association.

Bazerman, C. (2003). Speech acts, genres, and activity systems: How texts organize activity and people. In What writing does and how it does it (pp. 315--346). Routledge.

Bretag, T., & Carapiet, S. (2007). A preliminary study to identify the extent of self-plagiarism in Australian academic research (Vol. 2, No. 5, pp. 1--12). Plagiary.

Bruton

S. V.

(2014). Self-plagiarism and textual recycling: Legitimate forms of research misconduct. Accountability in Research, 21(3), 176–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.848071

Collberg, C., & Kobourov, S. (2005). Self-plagiarism in computer science. Communications of the ACM, 48(4), 88--94.

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2013). Text recyling guidelines. https://publicationethics.org/text-recycling-guidelines

Devitt, A. (1991). Intertextuality in Tax Accounting: Generic, Referential, and Functional. In C. Bazerman, & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual Dynamics of the Professions: Historical and Contemporary Studies of Writing in Professional Communities (pp. 336--357). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Eaton, S. E., & Crossman, K. (2018). Self-plagiarism research literature in the social sciences: A scoping review. Interchange, 49(3), 285--311. doi:10.1007/s10780-018-9333-6

Eckel

E. J.

(2011). Textual appropriation in engineering Master’s theses: A preliminary study. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(3), 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-010-9214-6

10.

García-Romero, A., & Estrada-Lorenzo, J. M. (2014). A bibliometric analysis of plagiarism and self-plagiarism through Déjà vu. Scientometrics, 101(1), 381-396.

11.

Hall

Moskovitz

Pemberton

M. A.

(2018). Attitudes toward text recycling in academic writing across disciplines. Accountability in Research, 25(3), 142–169.

12.

Halupa, C., & Bolliger, D. U. (2013). Faculty perceptions of student self plagiarism: An exploratory multi-university study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11(4), 297--310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-013-9195-6

13.

Halupa, C., & Bolliger, D. U. (2015). Student perceptions of self-plagiarism: A multi-university exploratory study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(1), 91--105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9228-4

14.

Halupa, C., Breitenbach, E., & Anast, A. (2016). A self-plagiarism intervention for doctoral students: A qualitative pilot study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14, 175--189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-016-9262-x

15.

Horbach, S. S., & Halffman, W. W. (2017). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’. Research policy.

16.

Howard, R. M., & Watson, M. (2010). The scholarship of plagiarism: Where we've been, where we are, what's needed next. WPA: Writing Program Administration, 33(3), 116--124.

17.

Michaelson, Herbert. (1990). How an author can avoid the pitfalls of practical ethics. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 33(2), 58--61.

18.

Moskovitz

(2017). Text recycling in health sciences research literature: A rhetorical perspective. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-017-0025-z

19.

Moskovitz

(2019). Text recycling in scientific writing. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(3), 813–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0008-y

20.

Newberry

Austin

Lawson

Gorsuch

Darwin

(2011). Acclimating international graduate students to professional engineering ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 17(1), 171–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-009-9178-6

21.

Pemberton

Hall

Moskovitz

Anson

C. M.

(2019). Text recycling: Views of North American journal editors from an interview‐based study. Learned Publishing, 32(3).

22.

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

23.

Roig

(2015). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. https://ori.hhs.gov/content/avoiding-plagiarism-self-plagiarism-and-other-questionable-writing-practices-guide-ethical-writing

24.

Scanlon, P. M. (2007). Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism. Plagiary: Cross-Disciplinary Studies in Plagiarism, Fabrication, and Falsification, 57.

25.

Scott, D. P., &Lorraine C. S. (1986). Duplicate publication: An increasing problem. Council of Biological Editors Views, 9(1), 4--8.

26.

Van Valey

Hartmann

Fuqua

Evans

Ing

A. D.

Meyer

, Staros, K., & Walmsley

(2015). The process of ethical decision-making: Experts vs novices. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9223-1

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.25 MB

Text Recycling in STEM Research: An Exploratory Investigation of Expert and Novice Beliefs and Attitudes

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material