J Korean Med Sci.  2017 Aug;32(8):1220-1227. 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.8.1220.

Plagiarism in the Context of Education and Evolving Detection Strategies

• Gasparyan
• Nurmashev
• Seksenbayev B
• Trukhachev VI
• Kostyukova EI
• Kitas GD

• KMID: 2439453
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2017.32.8.1220

Abstract

Plagiarism may take place in any scientific journals despite currently employed anti-plagiarism tools. The absence of widely acceptable definitions of research misconduct and reliance solely on similarity checks do not allow journal editors to prevent most complex cases of recycling of scientific information and wasteful, or "˜predatory,' publishing. This article analyses Scopus-based publication activity and evidence on poor writing, lack of related training, emerging anti-plagiarism strategies, and new forms of massive wasting of resources by publishing largely recycled items, which evade the "˜red flags' of similarity checks. In some non-Anglophone countries "˜copy-and-paste' writing still plagues pre- and postgraduate education. Poor research management, absence of courses on publication ethics, and limited access to quality sources confound plagiarism as a cross-cultural and multidisciplinary phenomenon. Over the past decade, the advent of anti-plagiarism software checks has helped uncover elementary forms of textual recycling across journals. But such a tool alone proves inefficient for preventing complex forms of plagiarism. Recent mass retractions of plagiarized articles by reputable open-access journals point to critical deficiencies of current anti-plagiarism software that do not recognize manipulative paraphrasing and editing. Manipulative editing also finds its way to predatory journals, ignoring the adherence to publication ethics and accommodating nonsense plagiarized items. The evolving preventive strategies are increasingly relying on intelligent (semantic) digital technologies, comprehensively evaluating texts, keywords, graphics, and reference lists. It is the right time to enforce adherence to global editorial guidance and implement a comprehensive anti-plagiarism strategy by helping all stakeholders of scholarly communication.

Keyword

Plagiarism; Information Retrieval; Similarity Detection; Research Activity; Retraction of Publication as Topic; Research and Development; Publication Ethics

MeSH Terms

Education*
Ethics
Information Storage and Retrieval
Plagiarism*
Publications
Recycling
Retraction of Publication as Topic
Scientific Misconduct
Writing

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Number of Scopus-indexed items tagged with the term “Plagiarism” in 1970–2017 (as of March 31, 2017).

Reference

1. Roig M. Avoiding unethical writing practices. Food Chem Toxicol. 2012; 50:3385–3387.

2. Council of Science Editors (US). CSE's white paper on promoting integrity in scientific journal publications, 2012 update [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at http://cseditors.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/entire_whitepaper.pdf.

3. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity. ORI policy on plagiarism [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at https://ori.hhs.gov/ori-policy-plagiarism.

4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity. Copyright infringement, fair use, and plagiarism [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at https://ori.hhs.gov/plagiarism-18.

5. Wittmaack K. Penalties plus high-quality review to fight plagiarism. Nature. 2005; 436:24.

6. Roig M. Plagiarism: consider the context. Science. 2009; 325:813–814.

7. Resnik DB, Dinse GE. Scientific retractions and corrections related to misconduct findings. J Med Ethics. 2013; 39:46–50.

8. Chaddah P. Not all plagiarism requires a retraction. Nature. 2014; 511:127.

9. Self-plagiarism: unintentional, harmless, or fraud? Lancet. 2009; 374:664.

10. Helgesson G, Eriksson S. Plagiarism in research. Med Health Care Philos. 2015; 18:91–101.

11. Supak-Smocić V, Bilić-Zulle L. How do we handle self-plagiarism in submitted manuscripts? Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2013; 23:150–153.

12. Stone TE, Conway J. Editorial: Self-plagiarism prevention and management at Nursing & Health Sciences. Nurs Health Sci. 2017; 19:1–4.

13. de Almeida RM, Catelani F, Fontes-Pereira AJ, Gave Nde S. Retractions in general and internal medicine in a high-profile scientific indexing database. Sao Paulo Med J. 2016; 134:74–78.

14. Beall J. Dangerous predatory publishers threaten medical research. J Korean Med Sci. 2016; 31:1511–1513.

15. Moylan EC, Kowalczuk MK. Why articles are retracted: a retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central. BMJ Open. 2016; 6:e012047.

16. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012; 109:17028–17033.

17. Amos KA. The ethics of scholarly publishing: exploring differences in plagiarism and duplicate publication across nations. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014; 102:87–91.

18. Heitman E, Litewka S. International perspectives on plagiarism and considerations for teaching international trainees. Urol Oncol. 2011; 29:104–108.

19. Shahghasemi E, Akhavan M. Confessions of academic ghost authors: the Iranian experience. SAGE Open. 2015; 5:1–7.

20. de Vasconcelos SM, Roig M. Prior publication and redundancy in contemporary science: are authors and editors at the crossroads? Sci Eng Ethics. 2015; 21:1367–1378.

21. Rathod SD. Combating plagiarism: a shared responsibility. Indian J Med Ethics. 2010; 7:173–175.

22. Vani K, Gupta D. Detection of idea plagiarism using syntax–semantic concept extractions with genetic algorithm. Expert Syst Appl. 2017; 73:11–26.

23. Park C. In other (people’s) words: plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons. Assess Eval High Educ. 2003; 28:471–488.

24. Wheeler G. Plagiarism in the Japanese universities: truly a cultural matter? J Second Lang Writ. 2009; 18:17–29.

25. Arda B. Publication ethics from the perspective of PhD students of health sciences: a limited experience. Sci Eng Ethics. 2012; 18:213–222.

26. Chaurasia A. Stop teaching Indians to copy and paste. Nature. 2016; 534:591.

27. Chien SC. Taiwanese college students’ perceptions of plagiarism: cultural and educational considerations. Ethics Behav. 2017; 27:118–139.

28. Zangenehmadar S, Hoon TB. ESL undergraduates’ patterns of plagiarism in academic essays based on print or internet sources. Pertanika J Soc Sci Humanit. 2017; 25:205–220.

29. Kim KJ, Hwang JY, Lee DW, Shim MS. Medical student plagiarism in problem-based learning courses. Med Educ Online. 2016; 21:30537.

30. Kayaoğlu MN, Erbay Ş, Flitner C, Saltaş D. Examining students’ perceptions of plagiarism: a cross-cultural study at tertiary level. J Furth High Educ. 2016; 40:682–705.

31. Ehrich J, Howard SJ, Mu C, Bokosmaty S. A comparison of Chinese and Australian university students’ attitudes towards plagiarism. Stud High Educ. 2016; 41:231–246.

32. Hu G, Sun X. Institutional policies on plagiarism: the case of eight Chinese universities of foreign languages/international studies. System. 2017; 66:56–68.

33. Bretag T. Challenges in addressing plagiarism in education. PLoS Med. 2013; 10:e1001574.

34. Kokkinaki AI, Demoliou C, Iakovidou M. Students’ perceptions of plagiarism and relevant policies in Cyprus. Int J Edu Integr. 2015; 11:3.

35. Varghese J, Jacob M. Do medical students require education on issues related to plagiarism? Indian J Med Ethics. 2015; 12:82–87.

36. Gharedaghi MH, Nourijelyani K, Salehi Sadaghiani M, Yousefzadeh-Fard Y, Gharedaghi A, Javadian P, Morteza A, Andrabi Y, Nedjat S. Knowledge of medical students of Tehran University of Medical Sciences regarding plagiarism. Acta Med Iran. 2013; 51:418–424.

37. Curtis GJ, Vardanega L. Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement. High Educ Res Dev. 2016; 35:1167–1179.

38. Rathore FA, Waqas A, Zia AM, Mavrinac M, Farooq F. Exploring the attitudes of medical faculty members and students in Pakistan towards plagiarism: a cross sectional survey. PeerJ. 2015; 3:e1031.

39. Gunnarsson J, Kulesza WJ, Pettersson A. Teaching international students how to avoid plagiarism: librarians and faculty in collaboration. J Acad Librariansh. 2014; 40:413–417.

40. Shaw C. International students are turning to proofreading agencies to get support [Inrernet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/apr/09/international-students-proofreading-academic-writing-support.

41. Jones-Berry S. Online market for nursing essays bigger than ever. Nurs Stand. 2016; 31:12–13.

42. Draper MJ, Ibezim V, Newton PM. Are Essay Mills committing fraud? An analysis of their behaviours vs the 2006 Fraud Act (UK). Int J Educ Integr. 2017; 13:3.

43. Lancaster T, Clarke R. The phenomena of contract cheating. In : Roberts TS, editor. Student Plagiarism in an Online World: Problems and Solutions. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference;2008. p. 144–159.

44. Rigby D, Burton M, Balcombe K, Bateman I, Mulatu A. Contract cheating & the market in essays. J Econ Behav Organ. 2015; 111:23–37.

45. Rathore FA, Farooq F. Plagiarism detection softwares: useful tools for medical writers and editors. J Pak Med Assoc. 2014; 64:1329–1330.

46. Li Y. Text-based plagiarism in scientific publishing: issues, developments and education. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013; 19:1241–1254.

47. Supak-Smolcić V, Simundić AM. Biochemia Medica has started using the CrossCheck plagiarism detection software powered by iThenticate. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2013; 23:139–140.

48. Thordarson DB. Plagiarism and journal ethics. Foot Ankle Int. 2013; 34:1611.

49. Jarić I. High time for a common plagiarism detection system. Scientometrics. 2016; 106:457–459.

50. Kleinert S. on behalf of the editors of all Lancet journals. Checking for plagiarism, duplicate publication, and text recycling. Lancet. 2011; 377:281–282.

51. iThenticate (US). Crossref similarity check powered by iThenticate [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at http://www.ithenticate.com/products/crosscheck.

52. Butler D. Journals step up plagiarism policing. Nature. 2010; 466:167.

53. Kalnins AU, Halm K, Castillo M. Screening for self-plagiarism in a subspecialty-versus-general imaging journal using iThenticate. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015; 36:1034–1038.

54. Chaddah P. Pursuing knowledge creation, India needs a policy on ‘plagiarism cells’. Curr Sci. 2014; 106:349.

55. Neuroskeptic (US). Plagiarism: copy, paste, thesaurus? [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2015/02/07/plagiarism-thesaurus/#.WQXZlBFOXcs.

56. Sun YC, Yang FY. Uncovering published authors’ text-borrowing practices: paraphrasing strategies, sources, and self-plagiarism. J Engl Acad Purposes. 2015; 20:224–236.

57. Chitra A, Rajkumar A. Plagiarism detection using machine learning-based paraphrase recognizer. J Intell Syst. 2016; 25:351–359.

58. Hussein AM. Paraphrasing: solution to the problem of plagiarism. Asian J Inf Technol. 2016; 15:2743–2746.

59. Franco-Salvador M, Gupta P, Rosso P, Banchs RE. Cross-language plagiarism detection over continuous-space- and knowledge graph-based representations of language. Knowl Base Syst. 2016; 111:87–99.

60. Franco-Salvador M, Rosso P, Montes-y-Gómez M. A systematic study of knowledge graph analysis for cross-language plagiarism detection. Inf Process Manage. 2016; 52:550–570.

61. Asghari H, Mohtaj S, Fatemi O, Faili H, Rosso P, Potthast M. Algorithms and corpora for Persian plagiarism detection. CEUR Workshop Proc. 2016; 1737:135–144.

62. Ehsan N, Shakery A. Candidate document retrieval for cross-lingual plagiarism detection using two-level proximity information. Inf Process Manage. 2016; 52:1004–1017.

63. Gipp B, Meuschke N, Breitinger C. Citation-based plagiarism detection: practicability on a large-scale scientific corpus. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2014; 65:1527–1540.

64. Pertile SD, Moreira VP, Rosso P. Comparing and combining content- and citation-based approaches for plagiarism detection. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2016; 67:2511–2526.

65. Rabiu I, Salim N. Textual and structural approaches to detecting figure plagiarism in scientific publications. J Theor Appl Inf Technol. 2014; 70:356–371.

66. Zrnec A, Lavbič D. Social network aided plagiarism detection. Br J Educ Technol. 2017; 48:113–128.

67. Almeida RM, de Albuquerque Rocha K, Catelani F, Fontes-Pereira AJ, Vasconcelos SM. Plagiarism allegations account for most retractions in major Latin American/Caribbean databases. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016; 22:1447–1456.

68. Callaway E. Publisher pulls 58 articles by Iranian scientists over authorship manipulation [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Avalable at http://www.nature.com/news/publisher-pulls-58-articles-by-iranian-scientists-over-authorship-manipulation-1.20916.

69. Retraction Watch (US). Springer, BMC retracting nearly 60 papers for fake reviews and other issues [Internet]. accessed on 31 March 2017. Available at http://retractionwatch.com/2016/11/01/springer-bmc-retracting-nearly-60-papers-for-fake-reviews-and-other-issues/#more-45774.

70. A M Duarte F. RETRACTION of articles with common plagiarism. Genet Mol Res. 2016; 15:gmr1504005.

71. Lykkesfeldt J. Strategies for using plagiarism software in the screening of incoming journal manuscripts: recommendations based on a recent literature survey. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2016; 119:161–164.

72. Dyer O. Peer reviewer stole article and published it as his own. BMJ. 2016; 355:i6768.

73. Yahaghi J, Beddu SB, Muda ZC. Plagiarism in publications using the unpublished raw data of archived research. Sci Eng Ethics. 2017; 23:635–636.

74. Yilmaz I. Plagiarism? No, we’re just borrowing better English. Nature. 2007; 449:658.

75. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Akazhanov NA, Kitas GD. Self-correction in biomedical publications and the scientific impact. Croat Med J. 2014; 55:61–72.

76. Gasparyan AY, Nurmashev B, Udovik EE, Koroleva AM, Kitas GD. Predatory publishing is a threat to non-mainstream science. J Korean Med Sci. 2017; 32:713–717.

77. Jansen PA, Forget PM. Predatory publishers and plagiarism prevention. Science. 2012; 336:1380.

78. Jargin SV. Pathology in the former Soviet Union: scientific misconduct and related phenomena. Dermatol Pract Concept. 2011; 1:75–81.

79. Yalcintas A, Wible JR. Scientific misconduct and research ethics in economics: an introduction. Rev Soc Econ. 2016; 74:1–6.

80. Hong ST. Plagiarism continues to affect scholarly journals. J Korean Med Sci. 2017; 32:183–185.

81. Rai R, Sabharwal S. Retracted publications in orthopaedics: prevalence, characteristics, and trends. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99:e44.

82. Pierson CA. Avoiding ethics pitfalls in publishing: a perspective from COPE. Oral Dis. 2017; 23:416–419.

83. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (US). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals [Internet]. accessed on 17 May 2017. Available at http://icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf.

84. Glänzel W, Braun T, Schubert A, Zosimo-Landolfo G. Coping with copying. Scientometrics. 2015; 102:1–3.

85. Kojima T, Barron JP. Protect yourself from plagiarism. Jpn J Gastroenterol Surg. 2016; 49:1179–1180.