Research Ethics 10 (4):187-195 (2014)

Abstract
Plagiarism is plaguing research publications in many fields. It is problematic by being misleading about who deserves credit for scientific results, images, text or ideas, by involving scientific fraud and by distorting meta-analyses. However, different research traditions put different emphasis on the originality of text. Traditional rules regarding correct quotation seem to fit the humanities and many social sciences better than the natural and engineering sciences. This article suggests that we should stop applying a common standard regarding plagiarism to all research fields and instead openly acknowledge that there are differences in what aspects of a paper are important to scientific development in different research areas. More specifically, the article discusses, as a thought experiment, whether the introduction of software supporting text production for research publications in the natural and engineering sciences – thereby further reducing the importance of who created what sentences – would be unacceptable or, quite the reverse, a means to further promote scientific progress. It is concluded that there are no valid principled arguments against introducing such software support for text production in scientific papers, while there are several advantages. Correctly handled, using such software would not involve plagiarism, because it would not be misleading about who deserves credit
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1177/1747016114552686
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,981
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Plagiarism in Research.Gert Helgesson & Stefan Eriksson - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (1):91-101.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Self-Plagiarism or Appropriate Textual Re-Use?Tracey Bretag & Saadia Mahmud - 2009 - Journal of Academic Ethics 7 (3):193-205.
Electronic Media, Creativity and Plagiarism.Naveed Imran - 2010 - Acm Sigcas Computers and Society 40 (4):25-44.
The Instructional Challenges of Student Plagiarism.Erika Löfström & Pauliina Kupila - 2013 - Journal of Academic Ethics 11 (3):231-242.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-03-25

Total views
31 ( #339,939 of 2,427,504 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #533,878 of 2,427,504 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes