http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57676/ When is self-plagiarism ok? Posted by Jef Akst View comments(31) | Comment on this news story Read more: When is self-plagiarism ok? - The Scientist - Magazine of the Life Sciences http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57676/#ixzz0zbIuqH1e When Robert Barbato of the E. Philip Saunders College of Business at Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT) heard he was being accused of plagiarizing his own work, he was a bit surprised. I can't plagiarize myself -- those are my own words, he said. And he is not alone in his views. Some scientists and publishers argue that it's unavoidable for scientists to re-use portions of their own text (not images or data, of course) from previous papers, and doing so may even be good practice. But others disagree, including many journals -- who have retracted papers in response. There are many ways you can say the same thing even when it comes to very technical language, said Miguel Roig of St. John's University, who has written extensively about plagiarism in academic literature. It's a matter of what some have labeled poor scholarly etiquette. In Barbato's case, the institutional committee formed to review the case unanimously decided to dismiss it. While the authors had reused some text in the introduction and methodology sections in two papers they had submitted simultaneously on gender differences in entrepreneurial business endeavors, the data were different and the papers reached vastly different conclusions. Nobody saw anything wrong with this really, recalled Patrick Scanlon of RIT's department of communication, who served on the committee. Sometimes is just unavoidable, agreed Catriona Fennell, director of journal services at Elsevier. Really, how many different ways can you say the same thing? Because scientists tend to study the same topic over many years or even their entire careers, some aspects of their research papers, particularly the literature review and methodology, will be repeated. Once they've figured out how to word it succinctly and accurately, some argue, it's best left unchanged. You're laying the groundwork for an ongoing discussion making changes might actually be a bad idea, Scanlon said. It would muddy the waters. Indeed, even editors that tend to be on the strict side when it comes to text recycling make exceptions. Anesthesia Analgesia recently pulled a paper due to the offense, as reported on the Retraction Watch blog, but the journal's Editor-in-Chief Steven Shafer said that the publication does not retract papers that only reuse text in the methodology section. This is a very difficult area, admitted Shafer. While the recently retracted paper contained multiple areas of duplicated verbatim or nearly verbatim text throughout, he said, not all cases are so straightforward, and each one must be a judgment call. With evidence that duplicate publications are on the rise, and estimates of more than 200,000 duplicates already archived in Medline, the scientific community is in dire need of better guidelines as to where to draw the line with respect to self-plagiarism -- and a better way of catching those that cross it. It's unfortunately a very gray area, said Jonathan Bailey, a copyright and plagiarism consultant and a writer for the website Plagiarism Today. come to me asking what the lines are, I always have to say the same thing: 'You're going to have to talk to the publication you're submitting to.' The problem is that most publications don't have hard and fast rules, Fennell said of Elsevier's journals. The most comprehensive guidelines with respect to self-plagiarism come from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), but these guidelines refer only to truly redundant publication, in which authors are attempting to pawn off old research as fresh and new. They contain no advice about scientists re-using their own text. There's nothing that says you can't have over 30 percent of your introduction being highly similar, said Harold Skip Garner, executive director of the Virginia Bioinformatics Institute, who has published several articles on plagiarism in scientific publishing. There's nothing like that because it's impossible to calculate. The good news is that with the bulk of publishing now done electronically and the advent of text similarity software to recognize possible cases of redundant publishing, identifying copied text is becoming a much less onerous task than it used to be. eTBLAST, for example, is a free text comparison program that searches the millions of abstracts archived in Medline, as well as a few other publically available databases. Once the publication spots a possible duplication, it's added to the Dj vu database of highly similar citations, where scientists can evaluate and comment on the entries. Probably the most widely used program to spot plagiarism in scientific publishing is Crosscheck, launched in June 2008 by CrossRef. A total of 119 publishers (nearly 50,000 journals) subscribe to the plagiarism detection program, including Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, and Springer, who donate their full text content to the database, which currently holds some 25 million pieces of scientific literature, and is growing steadily, according to CrossRef Product Manager Kirsty Meddings. Crosscheck's subscribers can scan the database with the same iThenticate software used by Turnitin to check for possible duplications. So far, the journals that have put the technology to use say it's working. Of the 60 papers flagged as having a high percentage of overlap with other publications in the first three months that the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics used Crosscheck (starting last March), about 60 percent were self plagiarism, said David Marshall, the publisher at SIAM. That is the majority of what we're uncovering. In my view, is one of the best things that ever happened because it puts scientists on notice, Roig said. Indeed, some journals have taken to explicitly announcing that they use Crosscheck in their instructions to authors, and/or post the Crosscheck logo on their website, hoping that just the threat of getting caught will act as a deterrent. Even with these programs, however, editors must be careful, Bailey warned -- even high degree of text similarity can sometimes be legit. It really is about context, Fennell agreed. It's good software, but it doesn't replace human judgment. The problem now is how to weed through the hundreds of thousands of suspected cases of duplicated publications currently in the scientific literature. It's one thing to be a deterrent and preventative in the future, said Garner, but who's going to clean up the mess that's already there? Related stories: Plagiarism retracts review You've been plagiarized UK psychiatrist suspended for plagiarism Read more: When is self-plagiarism ok? - The Scientist - Magazine of the Life Sciences http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57676/#ixzz0zbImej4K
王 应 宽 2009-08-24 UTC-6 CST UMN, St. Paul 什么是自我剽窃？ (What is self-plagiarism?) 自我剽窃（ Self-plagiarism ） ，又名再循环欺骗（ recycling fraud ） ，是指重复使用作者自己作品中重要的、相同的或近乎相同的部分内容而没有告知这样做或没有引用原文献。这类文章通常被认为是复制品（ duplicate ）或重复发表（ multiple publication ）。就学术伦理而言，如果被复制的先前作品的版权已经转让给其他出版机构，这样做是违法的。通常，自我剽窃只被视作严重的学术道德问题，因为这些复制的作品也常被作者宣称为新的成果，如学术出版领域的论文成果和教学方面的成果 。但这种情况除法律意义以外，不适用于公共兴趣的文本，如通常发表在报纸或通俗杂志上的关于社会、行业和文化方面的见解。还有，如学术成果发表在专业学术期刊之后再改写为新闻稿发表在报纸等大众媒体也不算作自我剽窃。有了这种认知的背景，就不难理解为什么经常发现某人的一篇文章重复发表在多家报章杂志或被转载若干次，也没有人谴责其重复发表或一稿多发了。 在学术领域，自我剽窃，是指作者在后续出版物中重复使用他们自己已经发表的或已有版权的作品，但又没有引用前面的出版物 。判定自我剽窃往往很难，因为有限的重复使用材料不论在法律上（如合理使用 ）还是伦理上都是可接受的。 有人辩称，自我剽窃术语自相矛盾，站不住脚 。因为根据剽窃的定义，主要指使用他人的作品，而不是自己的。 Stephanie J. Bird 就认为，自我剽窃术语是一个使用不当的名称。但是，该词语用于指潜在不道德发表的特定形式。 Stephanie J. Bird 将两次或多次冗余发表（ dual or redundant publication ）这种道德问题判定为自我抄袭。在教育领域，自我剽窃还用于指学生提交同一篇文章去骗取两门或以上课程的学分。 David B. Resnik 认为，自我剽窃只涉及学术不诚实，但不涉及知识盗窃 。 Roig 提出一种有用的分类系统，认为自我剽窃主要包括 4 种类型 ：在不同的期刊重复发表同一篇文章；把同一个研究分割为多篇文章发表，通常称为切香肠；文本再循环利用；版权侵犯。 维基百科. Plagiarism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism http://faculty.law.lsu.edu/stuartgreen/pdf/j-green2.pdf Stuart Green Hexham, I. (2005). Academic Plagiarism Defined . http://www.ucalgary.ca/~hexham/study/plag.html . Broome, Marion E. (2004). Self-plagiarism: oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct? Nursing Outlook, Vol. 52 (6), November, pp.273-274. Self-plagiarism and Dual and Redundant Publications: What Is the Problem? http://www.springerlink.com/content/w4r30223m162h804/ See Resnik, David B. (1998). The Ethics of Science: an introduction, London: Routledge. p.177, notes to chapter six, note 3. Online via Google Books Roig, M. (2005). Re-using text from ones own previously published papers: An exploratory study of potential self-plagiarism. Psychological Reports, 97, 43-49. 关于 Self-plagiarism 的其他定义 1 Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) defines self-plagiarism as the verbatim or near-verbatim reuse of significant portions of one's own copyrighted work without citing the original source. （See Collberg and Kobourov, http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1053291.1053293 ） 美国计算机协会对自我剽窃的定义为：逐字逐句或近似逐字逐句的再利用自己已取得版权作品的部分重要内容而又没有引用原文献。 2 As Hexam (1999) points out, it is possible to steal from oneself as when one engages in embezzlement or insurance fraud.In writing, self-plagiarism occurs when authors reuse their own previously written work or data in a new written product without letting the reader know that this material has appeared elsewhere.According to Hexam, the essence of self-plagiarism is the author attempts to deceive the reader . 在写作中，自我剽窃发生在当作者在新的作品中重复利用他们以前的作品或数据，且没有告知作者这些材料已经发表在其他地方。根据 Hexam 的定义，自我剽窃的实质就是作者试图欺骗读者。 3 Typically, self-plagiarism refers to the reusing of old writing in new works. For example, an author reusing passages in a new book or a scientist rehashing previously published research as if it were brand new. Im not sure what the name for this type of problem is, Ive heard it referred to as shotgun submissions or duplicate submissions but not really self plagiarism. 自我剽窃是指在新作品中重复再利用老作品。 4 The most common method of self - plagiarism is text reuse or text recycling , defined as the reuse of one's previously published work that includes almost identical methodology, literature reviews, discussions, and other similar or identical textual material . Source: Roig M. Re-using text from ones own previously published papers: an exploratory study of potential self-plagiarism. Psychol Rep 2005;97:4349. 自我剽窃最常用的方法是文本再利用或文本循环利用，被定义为重复利用以前已发表的作品，包括几乎相同的方法、文献综述、讨论和其他类似或相同的文本材料。 5 Self - plagiarism involves copying from one's own work without proper attribution. 自我剽窃涉及复制自己的作品而没有正确注明出处。 6 Essentially, self-plagiarism is duplication, it's a kind of cheating. 本质上看， 自我剽窃就是重复发表，是一种欺骗行为。 7 Self - plagiarism occurs when an author reuses portions of their previous writings in subsequent research papers. 自我剽窃发生在后续的研究论文中重复利用以前作品的部分内容。 8 Self-plagiarism is when an author reuses portions of his or her previous writings in subsequent research papers. 自我剽窃就是作者在后续文章中重复再利用其以前的作品中的部分内容。 其他文献： Stepchyshyn, Vera; Robert S. Nelson (2007). Library plagiarism policies. Assoc of College Resrch Libraries. p.65. ISBN 0838984169 . Klein A. (June 8, 2007). Opinion: Why Do They Do It? . The New York Sun. http://www.nysun.com/article/56158 . Retrieved 2007-12-11. Hart, M.; Friesner, Tim (December 15, 2004), research Plagiarism and Poor Academic Practice A Threat to the Extension of e-Learning in Higher Education? , Electronic Journal of E-Learning, http://www.ejel.org/volume-2/vol2-issue1/issue1-art25.htm research, retrieved 2007-12-11 Kock, N. (1999). A case of academic plagiarism . Communications of the ACM, 42(7), 96-104. Kock, N. , Davison, R. (2003). Dealing with plagiarism in the IS research community: A look at factors that drive plagiarism and ways to address them . MIS Quarterly, 27(4), 511-532. Clarke, R. (2006). Plagiarism by academics: More complex than it seems . Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(2), 91-121. List of cases of plagiarism among journalists Authorship gets lost on Web. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2006-07-31-net-plagiarism_x.htm?POE=TECISVA Online plagiarism strikes blog world. http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2006/05/08/online_plagiarism_strikes_blog_world/ http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-5663303-7.html , http://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2005/08/30/copyscape-searches-for-scraped-content http://faculty.law.lsu.edu/stuartgreen/pdf/j-green2.pdf Stuart Green See for example Dellavalle, Robert P., Banks, Marcus A. and Ellis, Jeffrey I. (2007). Frequently asked questions regarding self-plagiarism: How to avoid recycling fraud. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Vol. 57 (3), September, pp.527. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.10.071 See Allow me to rephrase, and boost my tally of articles, by Rebecca Attwood, Times Higher Education Supplement, 3 July 2008 Hexham, I. (2005). Academic Plagiarism Defined . http://www.ucalgary.ca/~hexham/study/plag.html . Samuelson, P . (1994). Self-Plagiarism or Fair Use? Communications of the ACM, 37(August): 21-25. Broome, Marion E. (2004). Self-plagiarism: oxymoron, fair use, or scientific misconduct? Nursing Outlook, Vol. 52 (6), November, pp.273-274. http://www.springerlink.com/content/w4r30223m162h804/ Self-plagiarism and Dual and Redundant Publications: What Is the Problem? See Resnik, David B. (1998). The Ethics of Science: an introduction, London: Routledge. p.177, notes to chapter six, note 3. Online via Google Books Scanlon, Patrick M. (2007). Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism. Plagiary: cross-disciplinary studies in plagiarism, fabrication and falsification, Vol. 2 (1), pp.1-11 Section 21.1 American Society for Public Administration, Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct . American Historical Association. 2005-01-06. http://www.historians.org/PUBS/Free/ProfessionalStandards.cfm . Retrieved 2009-04-16.
标签: Self-plagiarism
