SELF-PLAGIARISM QA FORUM
This site includes the QPart of the webcast entitled, “What’s Mine is Mine: Self-plagiarism, Possession and Author Responsiblity,” which featured Rachael Lammey from CrossRef, Kelly McBride from Poynter and Jonathan Bailey from Plagiarism Today. Bob Creutz, Executive Director of iThenticate, joins the panel in supplying responses to questions which were requested throughout the webcast.
20 QA’s about Self-plagiarism
A: (Rachael) Here’s an excellent connect to articles in Biochemica Medica known as ‘Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: what every author should know’. It is going into detail on the different sorts of self-plagiarism, duplicate publication being one of these: world wide web.biochemia-medica.com/content/plagiarism-and-self-plagiarism-what-every-author-should-know
A: (Rachael) I believe the important thing factor is ensuring you reference the prior work that you’re using properly. Allow it to be obvious to anybody studying your paper which areas of your projects happen to be printed formerly where. Also, seek advice from the specific publication you’re submitting to in situation there is a specific policy for this effect. Here’s a good example in the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) that reflects the insurance policy for his or her titles: world wide web.acm.org/publications/policies/plagiarism_policy.
Should you consider the second paragraph you’ll observe that the written text need not be quoted, but needs to be reported. Many publishers have policies similar to this so it’s always worth checking individuals to determine the best way to reference your formerly printed work.
A: (Rachael) Again, I’d say look into the writer policy (or, if it’s not obvious send them an email) but because lengthy while you make sure that you’re citing your previous work and which makes it obvious to anybody studying it the material isn’t ‘new’ you would then do not be charged with passing material off as new if this was already used.
A: (Rachael) See link in response to Q1: duplicate publication is a kind of self-plagiarism.
A: (Rachael) Most publishers their very own policies on self-plagiarism – I’d turn to the writer sources for that writer you need to submit your quest to for information. So for example, you’ve seen the ACM one above, and there’s an insurance policy from Nature here: world wide web.nature.com/authors/policies/plagiarism.html.
Actually, there’s a number of really helpful links in this article: www3.imperial.ac.united kingdom/library/researchers/plagiarismdetection which will provide guidelines on self-plagiarism and the way to consider citing your projects so that you can provide clearness for readers.
A: (Bob) Anecdotal feedback from CrossCheck people signifies that editors are largely unconcerned with plagiarism in method sections. Actually, it’s been requested that iThenticate features a feature that excludes methods from originality check.
(Rachael) I’d accept Bob. An Editor studying the paper like a subject specialist will realize that there’ll always be considered a amount of overlap/exactly the same methods section when the same method has been utilized.
A: (Bob) Authors can ask that publishers retract articles.
(Rachael) Yes, they are able to contact the writer to ask that the content be retracted or ask the writer for advice.
A: (Rachael) See response to Q1 as well as the resource pointed out in Q5 for descriptions of various types of self-plagiarism.
A: (Rachael) Just like Q3.
A: (Rachael) Every journal is a touch different because it is frequently to the Editor’s discretion in regards to what they’re searching for inside a paper. If you’re re-using lots of text, then it’s best to really make it obvious inside your paper what’s new relating to this version or why/the way it is different from your previous work. Again, it’s essential to reference your previous work clearly within the paper. Should you reference/cite as reported by the journal or writer instructions they can observe that your intent isn’t to mislead. Intent is nearly impossible to demonstrate, a lot of editors may united nations-submit the paper and get so that it is correctly referenced when they think that it’s not or allow the author provide more information to explain the way the work has been utilized formerly. It’s unlikely that sanctions could be taken against a writer inside a situation similar to this, particularly if the author co-operated using the Editor in supplying the extra information requested.
A: (Rachael) I’d contact the writer that has printed the job and supply the data you are able to about how your quest continues to be appropriated through the other author. They ought to possess a procedure that they’ll follow to be able to follow-on your concerns.
A: (Rachael) I’d seek advice from the newspaper what their policy is, however if you simply reference it properly then that can help provide clearness for readers.
A: (Rachael) Lots of publishers will their very own policies about this as well as on re-using information from conference papers, and so i would check together. The majority are fine with authors re-utilizing their own work in this manner, but it’s better to seek advice from them how you can present it first.
A: (Rachael) This really is normally fine – it falls just a little under . If you publish inside a journal, you’ll have to sign a form. Take a look form and also the publisher’s policy. Most is going to be fine along with you re-while using information inside a PhD thesis because it is not for commercial use, but it’s best to make sure. You will find, you will have to reference the publication.
A: (Rachael) Normally self-plagiarism describes work that was already printed. In case your PhD dissertation continues to be printed then your policies explained the writer would apply when it comes to referencing etc. I’d check using the writer to be certain as with respect to the area of interest different approaches may affect different content articles.
A: (Rachael) See response to Q11.
A: (Rachael) To be sure this is hard. Many publishers/journals have standard letters they use in instances where they need the writer either to reference or re-write bits of the work they do. Some authors is going to be pleased for that help, some might never resubmit and a few might return angrily but yet I believe that’s the situation regardless of how carefully you phrase the letter for them. I’d ask your writer when they will have any text you should use (and adjust to make specific for your publication) and when you treat each author who you have to contact within the same fashion i then think that’s all you are able do.
A: (Rachael) There’s lots of discussion around follow-up actions with authors and it’s something which I’d urge caution in performing. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) includes a situation in regards to this: publicationethics.org/situation/duplicate-publication-6 and they’d always advise against black-listing authors as a result a strategy can result in legal difficulties. If your journal or quantity of journals have experienced difficulties with a writer then you’ll have a tendency to remember them once they next arrived at submit, but realistically black-listing is tough to enforce (i.e. the writer could just come and resubmit within different current email address) also it can risk law suit from the writer.
A: (Kelly) From the perspective, self-plagiarism is restricted to simply the particular words and never the minds, which makes it acceptable to reuse such content as lengthy as nothing was copied verbatim.
A: (Kelly) noted that, if it’s online, it’s trivial to edit the job or give a note into it for any correction. However, with printed works, it’s an infinitely more difficult situation. It was echoed by Jonathan who noted there is nothing absolute on the internet however that with print, while there’s a correction or perhaps a retraction policy, it frequently feels inappropriate to actually address the problem as it might be either insufficient or too extreme based upon the character from the self-plagiarism.