Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2017 Aug;32(8):1220-1227.
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.8.1220.

Plagiarism in the Context of Education and Evolving Detection Strategies

Affiliations
Review

Plagiarism in the Context of Education and Evolving Detection Strategies

Armen Yuri Gasparyan et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2017 Aug.

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.

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

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

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

References

    1. Roig M. Avoiding unethical writing practices. Food Chem Toxicol. 2012;50:3385–3387. - PubMed
    1. 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.
    1. 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.
    1. 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.
    1. Wittmaack K. Penalties plus high-quality review to fight plagiarism. Nature. 2005;436:24. - PubMed