sample research paper plagiarism

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

Plagiarism in Research — The Complete Guide [eBook]

Table of Contents

Plagiarism can be described as the not-so-subtle art of stealing an already existing work, violating the principles of academic integrity and fairness. Well, there's no denying that we see further by standing on the shoulders of giants, and when it comes to constructing a research prose, we often need to look at the world through their lens. However, in this process, many students and researchers, knowingly or otherwise, resort to plagiarism.

In many instances, plagiarism is intentional, whether through direct copying or paraphrasing. Unfortunately, there are also times when it happens unintentionally. Regardless of the intent, plagiarism goes against the ethos of the scientific world and is considered a severe moral and disciplinary offense.

The good news is that you can avoid plagiarism and even work around it. So, if you're keen on publishing unplagiarized papers and maintaining academic integrity, you've come to the right place.

With this comprehensive ebook on plagiarism, we intend to help you understand what constitutes plagiarism in research, why it happens, plagiarism concepts and types, how you can prevent it, and much more.

What is plagiarism?

Plagiarism is defined as representing a part of or the entirety of someone else's work as your own. Whether published or unpublished, this could be ideas, text verbatim, infographics, etc. It is no different in the academic writing, either. However, it is not considered plagiarism if most of your work is original and the referred part is diligently cited.

The degree of plagiarism can vary from discipline to discipline. Like in mathematics or engineering, there are times when you have to copy and paste entire equations or proofs, which can take a significant chunk of your paper. Again, that is not constituted plagiarism, provided there's an analysis or rebuttal to it.

That said, there are some objective parameters defining plagiarism. Get to know them, and your life as a researcher will be much smoother.

Common types of plagiarism

Plagiarism often creeps into academic works in various forms, from complete plagiarism to accidental plagiarism.

The types of plagiarism varies depending on the two critical aspects — the writer's intention and the degree to which the prose is plagiarized. These aspects help institutions and publishers define plagiarism types more accurately.

The agreed-upon forms of plagiarism that occur in research writing include:

1. Global or Complete Plagiarism

Global or Complete plagiarism is inarguably the most severe form of plagiarism  — It is as good as stealing. It happens when an author blatantly copies somebody else's work in its entirety and passes it on as their own.

Since complete plagiarism is always committed deliberately and disguises the ownership of the work, it is directly recognized under copyright violation and can lead to intellectual property abuse and legal battles. That, along with irredeemable repercussions like a damaged reputation, getting expelled, or losing your job.

2. Verbatim or Direct Plagiarism

Verbatim or direct plagiarism happens when you copy a part of someone else's work, word-to-word, without providing adequate credits or attributions. The ideas, structure, and diction in your work would match the original author's work. Even if you were to change a few words or the position of sentences here and there, the final result remains the same.

The best way to avoid this is to minimize copy-pasting entire paragraphs and use it only when the situation calls for it. And when you do so, use quotation marks and in-text citations, crediting the original source.

3. Source-based Plagiarism

Source-based plagiarism results from an author trying to mislead or disguise the natural source of their work. Say you write a paper, giving enough citations, but when the editor or peer reviewers try to cross-check your references, they find a dead end or incorrect information. Another instance is when you use both primary and secondary data to support your argument but only cite the former with no reference for the latter.

In both cases, the information provided is either irrelevant or misleading. You may have cited it, but it does not support the text completely.

Similarly, another type of plagiarism is called data manipulation and counterfeiting . Data Manipulation is creating your own data and results. In contrast, data counterfeiting is skipping or adultering the key findings to suit your expected outcomes.

Using misinformed sources in a research study constitutes grave violations and offenses. Particularly in the medical field, it can lead to legal issues such as wrong data presentation. Its interpretation can lead to false clinical trials, which can have grave consequences.

4. Paraphrasing Plagiarism

Paraphrasing plagiarism is one of the more common types of plagiarism. It refers to when an author copies ideas, thoughts, and inferences, rephrases sentences, and then claims ownership.

Compared to verbatim, paraphrasing plagiarism involves changing words, sentences, semantics or translating texts. The general idea or the topic of the thesis, however, remains the same and as clever as it may seem, it is straightforward to detect.

More often authors commit paraphrasing by reading a few sources and writing them in their own words without due citation. This can lead the reader to believe that the idea was the author's own when it wasn’t.

5. Mosaic or Patchwork Plagiarism

One of the more mischievous ways to abstain from writing original work is mosaic plagiarism. Patchwork or mosaic plagiarism occurs when an author stitches together a research paper by lending pieces from multiple sources and weaving them as their creation. Sure, the author can add a few new words and phrases, but the meat of the paper is stolen.

It’s common for authors to refer to various sources during the research. But to patch them together and form a new paper from them is wrong.

Mosaic plagiarism can be difficult to detect, so authors, too confident in themselves, often resort to it. However, these days, there are plenty of online tools like Turnitin, Enago, and EasyBib that identify patchwork and correctly point to the sources from which you have borrowed.

6. Ghostwriting

Outside of the academic world, ghostwriting is entirely acceptable. Leaders do it, politicians do it, and artists do it. In academia, however, ghostwriting is a breach of conduct that tarnishes the integrity of a student or a researcher.

Ghostwriting is the act of using an unacknowledged person’s assistance to complete a paper. This happens in two ways — when an author has their paper’s foundation laid out but pays someone else to write, edit, and proofread. The other is when they pay someone to write the whole article from scratch.

In either case, it’s utterly unacceptable since the whole point of a paper is to exhibit an author's original thoughts presented by them. Ghostwriting, thus, raises a serious question about the academic capabilities of an author.

7. Self-plagiarism

This may surprise many, but rehashing previous works, even if they are your own, is also considered plagiarism. The biggest reason why self-plagiarism is a fallacy is because you’re trying to claim credit for something that you have already received credit for.

Authors often borrow their past data or experiment results, use them in their current work, and present them as brand new. Some may even plagiarize old published works' ideas, cues, or phrases.

The degree to which self-plagiarism is still under debate depends on the volume of work that has been copied. Additionally, many academic and non-academic journals have devised a fixed ratio on what percentage of self-plagiarism is acceptable. Unless you have made a proper declaration through citations and quotation marks about old data usage, it will fall under the scope of self-plagiarism.

8. Accidental Plagiarism

Apart from the intentional forms of plagiarism, there’s also accidental plagiarism. As the name suggests, it happens inadvertently. Unwitting paraphrasing, missing in-text or end-of-text citations, or not using quotation blocks falls under the same criteria.

While writing your academic papers, you have to stay cautious to avoid accidental plagiarism. The best way to do this is by going through your article thoroughly. Proofread as if your life depended on it, and check whether you’ve given citations where required.

Why is it important to avoid research plagiarism?

As a scholar, you must be aware that the sole purpose of any article or academic writing is to present an original idea to its readers. When the prose is plagiarized, it removes any credibility from the author, discredits the source, and leaves the reader misinformed which goes against the ethos of academic institutions.

Here are the few reasons why you should avoid research plagiarism:

Critical analysis is important

While writing research papers, an author must dive deep into finding various sources, like scholarly articles, especially peer-reviewed ones. You are expected to examine the sources keenly to understand the gaps in the chosen topic and formulate your research questions.

Crafting critical questions related to the field of study is essential as it displays your understanding and the analysis you employed to decipher the problems in the chosen topic. When you do this, your chances of being published improve, and it’s also good for your long-term career growth.

Streamlined scholarly communication

An extended form of scholarly communication is established when you respond and craft your academic work based on what others have previously done in a particular domain. By appropriately using others' work, i.e., through citations, you acknowledge the tasks done before you and how they helped shape your work. Moreover, citations expand the doorway for readers to learn more about a topic from the beginning to the current state. Plagiarism prevents this.

Credibility in originality

Originality is invaluable in the research community. From your thesis topic and fresh methodology to new data, conclusion, and tone of writing, the more original your paper is, the more people are intrigued by it. And as long as your paper is backed by credible sources, it further solidifies your academic integrity. Plagiarism can hinder these.

How does plagiarism happen?

Even though plagiarism is a cardinal sin and plagiarized academic writing is consistently rejected, it still happens. So the question is, what makes people resort to plagiarism?

Some of the reasons why authors choose the plagiarism include:

• Lack of knowledge about plagiarism
• Accidentally copying a work
• Forgetting to cite a source
• Desire to excel among peers
• A false belief that no one will catch them
• No interest in academic work and just taking that as an assignment
• Using shortcuts in the form of self-plagiarism
• Fear of failing

Whatever the reason an author may have, plagiarism can never be justified. It is seen as an unfair advantage and disrespect to those who have put in the blood, sweat, and tears into doing their due diligence. Additionally, remember that readers, universities, or publishers are only interested in your genuine ideas, and your evaluation, as an author, is done based on that.

Related Article: Citation Machine Alternatives — Top citation tools 2023

Consequences of plagiarism

We have reiterated enough that plagiarism is objectionable and has consequences. But what exactly are the consequences? Well, that depends on who the author is and the type of plagiarism.

For minor offenses like accidental plagiarism or missing citations, a slap on the wrist in the form of feedback from the editor or peers is the norm. For major cases, let’s take a look:

For students

• Poor grades

Even if you are a first-timer, your professor may choose to fail you, which can have a detrimental effect on your scores.

• Failing a course

It is not rare for professors to fail Ph.D. and graduate students when caught plagiarizing. Not only does this hurt your academics, but it also extends the duration of your study by a year.

• Disciplinary action

Every university or academic institution has strict policies and regulations regarding plagiarism. If caught, an author may have to face the academic review committee to decide their future. The results seen in general cases range from poor grades, failure for a year, or being banished from any academic or research-related work.

• Expulsion from the university

A university may resort to expulsion only in the worst of cases, like copyright violation or Intellectual Property theft.

• Tarnished academic reputation

This just might be the most consequential of all scenarios. It takes a lifetime to build a great impression but a few seconds to tarnish it. Many academics lose their peers' trust and find it hard to recover.  Moreover, background checks for future jobs or fellowships become a nightmare.

For universities

A university is built on reputation. Letting plagiarism slide is the quickest way to tarnish its reputation. This leads to lesser interest from top talent and publishers and trouble finding grant money.

Prospective students turning away from a university means losing out on tuition money. This further drives experienced faculty away. And the cycle continues.

For researchers

• Legal battles

Since it falls under copyright infringement, researchers may face legal battles if their academic work is believed to be plagiarized. There is no shortage of case studies, like those of Doris Kearns Goodwin or Mark Chabedi, where authors, without permission, used another person's work and claimed it to be their own. In all these instances, they faced legal issues that led to fines, barred from writing and research, and sometimes, imprisonment even.

• Professional reputation

Publishers and journals will not engage authors with a past of plagiarism to produce content under their brand name. Also, if the author is a professor or a fellow, it can lead to contract termination.

How to avoid plagiarism in research?

The simplest way to avoid plagiarism would be to put in the work. Do original research, collect new data, and derive new conclusions. If you use references, keep track of each and every single one and cite them in your paper.

To ensure that your academic writing or research paper is unique and free from any type of plagiarism, incorporate the following tips:

• Pay adequate attention to your references

Writing a paper requires extraordinary research. So, it’s understandable when researchers sometimes lose track of their references. This often leads to accidental plagiarism.

So, instead of falling into this trap, maintain lists or take notes of your reference while doing your research. This will help you when you’re writing your citations.

• Find credible sources

Always refer to credible sources, whether a paper, a conference proceeding or an infographic.  These will present unbiased evidence and accurate experimentation results with facts backing the evidence presented by your paper.

• Proper use of paraphrasing, quotations, and citations

It’s borderline impossible to avoid using direct references in your paper, especially if you’re providing a critical analysis or a rebuttal to an already existing article. So, to avoid getting prosecuted, use quotation marks when using a text verbatim.

In case you’re paraphrasing, use citations so that everyone knows that it’s not your idea. Credit the original author and a secondary source, if any. Publishers usually have guidelines about how to cite. There are many different styles like APA, MLA, Chicago, etc. Be on top of what your publisher demands.

Usually, it is observed that readers or the audience have a greater inclination towards paraphrasing than the quotes, especially if it is bulky sections. The reason is obvious: paraphrasing displays your understanding of the original work's meaning and interpretation, uniquely suiting the current state of affairs.

• Review and recheck your work multiple times

Before submitting the final, you must subject your work to scrutiny. Multiple times at that. The more you do it, the less your chances of falling under accidental plagiarism.  To ensure that your final work does not constitute any types of plagiarism, ensure that:

• There are no misplaced or missed citations
• The paraphrased text does not closely resemble the original text
• You don’t have any wrongful references
• You’re not missing quotation marks or failing to provide the author's credentials after quotation marks
• You use a plagiarism checker

More on how to avoid plagiarism .

On top of these, read your university or your publisher’s policies. All of them have their sets of rules about what’s acceptable and what’s not. They also define the punishment for any offense, factoring in its degree.

• Use Online Tools

After receiving your article, most universities, publishers, and other institutions will run it through plagiarism checkers, including AI detectors , to detect all types of plagiarism. These plagiarism checkers function based on drawing similarities between your article and previously published works present in their database. If found similar, your paper is deemed plagiarized.

You can always save yourself from embarrassment by staying a step ahead. Use a plagiarism checker before you submit your paper. Using plagiarism checker tools, you can quickly identify if you have committed plagiarism. Then, no one except you will know about it, and you will have a chance to correct yourself.

Best Plagiarism Checkers in 2023

Plagiarism checkers are an incredibly convenient tool for improving academic writing. Therefore, here are some of the best plagiarism checkers for academic writing.

Turnitin's iThenticate

This is one of the best plagiarism checker for your academic paper and a good fit for academic writers, researchers, and scholars.

Turnitin’s iThenticare claims to cross-check your paper against 99 billion+ current and archived web pages, 1.8 billion student papers, and best-in-class scholarly content from top publishers in every major discipline and dozens of languages.

The iThenticate plagiarism checker is now available on SciSpace. ( Instructions on how to use it .)

Grammarly serves as a one-stop solution for better writing. Through Grammarly, you can make your paper have fewer grammatical errors, better clarity, and, yes, be plagiarism-free.

Grammarly's plagiarism checker compares your paper to billions of web pages and existing papers online. It points out all the sentences which need a citation, giving you the original source as well. On top of this, Grammarly also rates your document for an originality score.

ProWritingAid

ProWritingAid is another AI writing assistant that offers a plethora of tools to better your document. One of its paid services include a ProWritingAid Plagiarism Checker that helps authors find out how much of their work is plagiarized.

Once you scan your document, the plagiarism checker gives you details like the percentage of non-original text, how much of that is quoted, and how much is not. It will also give you links so you can cite them as required.

EasyBib Plagiarism Checker

EasyBib Plagiarism Checker compares your writing sample with billions of available sources online to detect plagiarism at every level. You'll be notified which phrases are too similar to current research and literature, prompting a possible rewrite or additional citation.

Moreover, you'll get feedback on your paper's inconsistencies, such as changes in text, formatting, or style. These small details could suggest possible plagiarism within your assignment.

Plagiarism CheckerX

Working on the same principle of scanning and matching against various sources, the critical aspect of Plagiarism CheckerX is that you can download and use it whenever you wish. It is slightly faster than others and never stores your data, so you can stay assured of any data loss.

Compilatio Magister

Compilatio Magister is a plagiarism checker designed explicitly for teaching professionals. It lets you access turnkey educational resources, check for plagiarism against thousands of documents, and seek reliable and accurate analysis reports.

Quick Wrap Up

In the world of academia, the spectre of plagiarism lurks but fear not, for armed with awareness and right plagiarism checkers, you have the power to conquer this foe.

Even though plenty of students or researchers believe they can get away with it, it’s never the case. You owe it to yourself and everyone who has invested time and resources in you to publish original, plagiarism-free research work every time.

Throughout this eBook, we have explored the depths of plagiarism, unraveling its consequences and the importance of originality. Many universities have specific classes and workshops discussing plagiarism to create ample awareness of the subject. Thus, you should continue to be honourable in this regard and write papers from the heart.

Hey there! We encourage you to visit our SciSpace discover page to explore how our suite of products can make research workflows easier and allow you to spend more time advancing science.

With the best-in-class solution, you can manage everything from literature search and discovery to profile management, research writing, and much more.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. how to paraphrase without plagiarizing.

• Understand the original text completely.
• Write the idea in your own words without looking at the original text.
• Change the structure of sentences, not just individual words.
• Use synonyms wisely and ensure the context remains the same.
• Lastly, always cite the original source.

Even when paraphrasing, it's important to attribute ideas to the original author.

2. How to avoid plagiarism in research?

• Understand what constitutes plagiarism.
• Always give proper credit to the original authors when quoting or paraphrasing their work.
• Use plagiarism checker tools to ensure your work is original.
• Keep track of your sources throughout your research.
• Quote and paraphrase accurately.

3. Examples of plagiarism?

• Copying and pasting text directly from a source without quotation or citation.
• Paraphrasing someone else's work without correct citation.
• Presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own.
• Recycling or self-plagiarism, where you mention your previous work without citing it.

4. How much plagiarism is allowed in a research paper?

In the academic world, the goal is always to strive for 0% plagiarism. However, sometimes, minor plagiarism can occur unintentionally, such as when common phrases are matched in plagiarism software. Most institutions and publishers will allow a small percentage, typically under 10%, for such instances. Remember, this doesn't mean you can deliberately plagiarize 10% of your work.

5. What are the four types of plagiarism?

• Direct Plagiarism definition: This occurs when one directly copies someone else's work word-for-word without giving credit.
• Mosaic Plagiarism definition: This happens when someone borrows phrases from a source without using quotation marks, or finds synonyms for the author's language while keeping the same general structure and meaning.
• Accidental Plagiarism definition: This happens when a person neglects to cite their sources, or misquotes their sources, or unintentionally paraphrases a source by using similar words, groupings, or phrases without attribution.
• Self-Plagiarism definition: This happens when someone recycles their own work from a previous paper or study and presents it as new content without citing the original.

6. How much copying is considered plagiarism?

Any amount of copying can be considered plagiarism if you're presenting someone else's work as your own without attribution. Even a single sentence copied without proper citation can be seen as plagiarism. The key is to always give credit where it's due.

7. How to check plagiarism in a research paper?

There are numerous online tools and software that you can use to check plagiarism in a research paper. Some popular ones include Grammarly, and Copyscape. These tools compare your paper with millions of other documents on the web and databases to identify any matches. You can also use SciSpace paraphraser to rephrase the content and keep it unique.

You might also like

Plagiarism FAQs: 10 Most Commonly Asked Questions on Plagiarism in Research Answered

3 Common Mistakes in Research Publication, and How to Avoid Them

Academic Integrity Tutorial

• Examples of Plagiarism
• Le Moyne College Policy on Plagiarism
• Acceptable vs. Unacceptable
• What is a Citation?
• Why is Citing Important?
• When Do I Cite?
• How Do I Cite?
• Paraphrasing and Summarizing
• Practice Quiz
• Plagiarism and ChatGPT (Generative AI)

Real Life Examples of Plagiarism

Plagiarism has real and serious consequences, even when done unintentionally.  Below are examples of people who were caught plagiarizing and the consequences they faced.

• Kaavya Viswanathan In 2006, Kaavya Viswanathan published a young adult book. It was later discovered that Viswanathan plagiarized heavily from books by Megan McCafferty, among others. Viswanathan claims that the plagiarism was unintentional. However, her book was recalled from stores and taken out of print and Viswanathan lost her contract for a second book.
• Jonah Lehrer Jonah Lehrer recently resigned as a writer for the New Yorker after he was caught self-plagiarizing on a number of occasions and fabricating quotes for a book.
• Doris Kearns Goodwin Doris Kearns Goodwin is a historian who won the Pulitzer Prize in 1995. It was later discovered that Goodwin plagiarized in her 1987 book, The Fitzgeralds and the Kennedys. Once her plagiarism was discovered, Goodwin had to leave her position as a guest pundit on the PBS NewsHour program and resigned from the Pulitzer Board.

Here are some examples of Plagiarism:

• Turning in someone else's work as your own.
• Copying large pieces of text from a source without citing that source.
• Taking passages from multiple sources, piecing them together, and turning in the work as your own.
• Copying from a source but changing a few words and phrases to disguise plagiarism.
• Paraphrasing from a number of different sources without citing those sources.
• Turning in work that you did for another class without getting your professor's permission first.
• Buying an essay or paper and turning it in as your own work.

It is possible to cite sources but still plagiarize. Here are some examples:

• Mentioning an author or source within your paper without including a full citation in your bibliography.
• Citing a source with inaccurate information, making it impossible to find that source.
• Using a direct quote from a source, citing that source, but failing to put quotation marks around the copied text.
• Paraphrasing from multiple cited sources without including any original work.

Creative Commons License

• << Previous: What is Plagiarism?
• Next: Le Moyne College Policy on Plagiarism >>
• Last Updated: Sep 1, 2023 12:31 PM
• URL: https://resources.library.lemoyne.edu/guides/academicintegrity

• Utility Menu

fa3d988da6f218669ec27d6b6019a0cd

A publication of the harvard college writing program.

Harvard Guide to Using Sources 

• The Honor Code
• What Constitutes Plagiarism?

In academic writing, it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper. It doesn't matter whether the source is a published author, another student, a website without clear authorship, a website that sells academic papers, or any other person: Taking credit for anyone else's work is stealing, and it is unacceptable in all academic situations, whether you do it intentionally or by accident.

The ease with which you can find information of all kinds online means that you need to be extra vigilant about keeping track of where you are getting information and ideas and about giving proper credit to the authors of the sources you use. If you cut and paste from an electronic document into your notes and forget to clearly label the document in your notes, or if you draw information from a series of websites without taking careful notes, you may end up taking credit for ideas that aren't yours, whether you mean to or not.

It's important to remember that every website is a document with an author, and therefore every website must be cited properly in your paper. For example, while it may seem obvious to you that an idea drawn from Professor Steven Pinker's book The Language Instinct should only appear in your paper if you include a clear citation, it might be less clear that information you glean about language acquisition from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy website warrants a similar citation. Even though the authorship of this encyclopedia entry is less obvious than it might be if it were a print article (you need to scroll down the page to see the author's name, and if you don't do so you might mistakenly think an author isn't listed), you are still responsible for citing this material correctly. Similarly, if you consult a website that has no clear authorship, you are still responsible for citing the website as a source for your paper. The kind of source you use, or the absence of an author linked to that source, does not change the fact that you always need to cite your sources (see Evaluating Web Sources ).

Verbatim Plagiarism

If you copy language word for word from another source and use that language in your paper, you are plagiarizing verbatim . Even if you write down your own ideas in your own words and place them around text that you've drawn directly from a source, you must give credit to the author of the source material, either by placing the source material in quotation marks and providing a clear citation, or by paraphrasing the source material and providing a clear citation.

The passage below comes from Ellora Derenoncourt’s article, “Can You Move to Opportunity? Evidence from the Great Migration.”

Here is the article citation in APA style:

Derenoncourt, E. (2022). Can you move to opportunity? Evidence from the Great Migration. The American Economic Review , 112(2), 369–408. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20200002

Source material

Why did urban Black populations in the North increase so dramatically between 1940 and 1970? After a period of reduced mobility during the Great Depression, Black out-migration from the South resumed at an accelerated pace after 1940. Wartime jobs in the defense industry and in naval shipyards led to substantial Black migration to California and other Pacific states for the first time since the Migration began. Migration continued apace to midwestern cities in the 1950s and1960s, as the booming automobile industry attracted millions more Black southerners to the North, particularly to cities like Detroit or Cleveland. Of the six million Black migrants who left the South during the Great Migration, four million of them migrated between 1940 and 1970 alone.

Plagiarized version

While this student has written her own sentence introducing the topic, she has copied the italicized sentences directly from the source material. She has left out two sentences from Derenoncourt’s paragraph, but has reproduced the rest verbatim:

But things changed mid-century. After a period of reduced mobility during the Great Depression, Black out-migration from the South resumed at an accelerated pace after 1940. Wartime jobs in the defense industry and in naval shipyards led to substantial Black migration to California and other Pacific states for the first time since the Migration began. Migration continued apace to midwestern cities in the 1950s and1960s, as the booming automobile industry attracted millions more Black southerners to the North, particularly to cities like Detroit or Cleveland.

Acceptable version #1: Paraphrase with citation

In this version the student has paraphrased Derenoncourt’s passage, making it clear that these ideas come from a source by introducing the section with a clear signal phrase ("as Derenoncourt explains…") and citing the publication date, as APA style requires.

But things changed mid-century. In fact, as Derenoncourt (2022) explains, the wartime increase in jobs in both defense and naval shipyards marked the first time during the Great Migration that Black southerners went to California and other west coast states. After the war, the increase in jobs in the car industry led to Black southerners choosing cities in the midwest, including Detroit and Cleveland.

Acceptable version #2 : Direct quotation with citation or direct quotation and paraphrase with citation

If you quote directly from an author and cite the quoted material, you are giving credit to the author. But you should keep in mind that quoting long passages of text is only the best option if the particular language used by the author is important to your paper. Social scientists and STEM scholars rarely quote in their writing, paraphrasing their sources instead. If you are writing in the humanities, you should make sure that you only quote directly when you think it is important for your readers to see the original language.

In the example below, the student quotes part of the passage and paraphrases the rest.

But things changed mid-century. In fact, as Derenoncourt (2022) explains, “after a period of reduced mobility during the Great Depression, Black out-migration from the South resumed at an accelerated pace after 1940” (p. 379). Derenoncourt notes that after the war, the increase in jobs in the car industry led to Black southerners choosing cities in the midwest, including Detroit and Cleveland.

Mosaic Plagiarism

If you copy bits and pieces from a source (or several sources), changing a few words here and there without either adequately paraphrasing or quoting directly, the result is mosaic plagiarism . Even if you don't intend to copy the source, you may end up with this type of plagiarism as a result of careless note-taking and confusion over where your source's ideas end and your own ideas begin. You may think that you've paraphrased sufficiently or quoted relevant passages, but if you haven't taken careful notes along the way, or if you've cut and pasted from your sources, you can lose track of the boundaries between your own ideas and those of your sources. It's not enough to have good intentions and to cite some of the material you use. You are responsible for making clear distinctions between your ideas and the ideas of the scholars who have informed your work. If you keep track of the ideas that come from your sources and have a clear understanding of how your own ideas differ from those ideas, and you follow the correct citation style, you will avoid mosaic plagiarism.

Indeed, of the more than 3500 hours of instruction during medical school, an average of less than 60 hours are devoted to all of bioethics, health law and health economics combined . Most of the instruction is during the preclinical courses, leaving very little instructional time when students are experiencing bioethical or legal challenges during their hands-on, clinical training. More than 60 percent of the instructors in bioethics, health law, and health economics have not published since 1990 on the topic they are teaching.

--Persad, G.C., Elder, L., Sedig,L., Flores, L., & Emanuel, E. (2008). The current state of medical school education in bioethics, health law, and health economics. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 36 , 89-94.

Students can absorb the educational messages in medical dramas when they view them for entertainment. In fact, even though they were not created specifically for education, these programs can be seen as an entertainment-education tool [43, 44]. In entertainment-education shows, viewers are exposed to educational content in entertainment contexts, using visual language that is easy to understand and triggers emotional engagement [45]. The enhanced emotional engagement and cognitive development [5] and moral imagination make students more sensitive to training [22].

--Cambra-Badii, I., Moyano, E., Ortega, I., Josep-E Baños, & Sentí, M. (2021). TV medical dramas: Health sciences students’ viewing habits and potential for teaching issues related to bioethics and professionalism. BMC Medical Education, 21 , 1-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02947-7

Paragraph #1.

All of the ideas in this paragraph after the first sentence are drawn directly from Persad. But because the student has placed the citation mid-paragraph, the final two sentences wrongly appear to be the student’s own idea:

In order to advocate for the use of medical television shows in the medical education system, it is also important to look at the current bioethical curriculum. In the more than 3500 hours of training that students undergo in medical school, only about 60 hours are focused on bioethics, health law, and health economics (Persad et al, 2008). It is also problematic that students receive this training before they actually have spent time treating patients in the clinical setting. Most of these hours are taught by instructors without current publications in the field.

Paragraph #2.

All of the italicized ideas in this paragraph are either paraphrased or taken verbatim from Cambra-Badii, et al., but the student does not cite the source at all. As a result, readers will assume that the student has come up with these ideas himself:

Students can absorb the educational messages in medical dramas when they view them for entertainment. It doesn’t matter if the shows were designed for medical students; they can still be a tool for education. In these hybrid entertainment-education shows, viewers are exposed to educational content that triggers an emotional reaction. By allowing for this emotional, cognitive, and moral engagement, the shows make students more sensitive to training . There may be further applications to this type of education: the role of entertainment as a way of encouraging students to consider ethical situations could be extended to other professions, including law or even education.

The student has come up with the final idea in the paragraph (that this type of ethical training could apply to other professions), but because nothing in the paragraph is cited, it reads as if it is part of a whole paragraph of his own ideas, rather than the point that he is building to after using the ideas from the article without crediting the authors.

Acceptable version

In the first paragraph, the student uses signal phrases in nearly every sentence to reference the authors (“According to Persad et al.,” “As the researchers argue,” “They also note”), which makes it clear throughout the paragraph that all of the paragraph’s information has been drawn from Persad et al. The student also uses a clear APA in-text citation to point the reader to the original article. In the second paragraph, the student paraphrases and cites the source’s ideas and creates a clear boundary behind those ideas and his own, which appear in the final paragraph.

In order to advocate for the use of medical television shows in the medical education system, it is also important to look at the current bioethical curriculum. According to Persad et al. (2008), only about one percent of teaching time throughout the four years of medical school is spent on ethics. As the researchers argue, this presents a problem because the students are being taught about ethical issues before they have a chance to experience those issues themselves. They also note that more than sixty percent of instructors teaching bioethics to medical students have no recent publications in the subject.

The research suggests that medical dramas may be a promising source for discussions of medical ethics. Cambra-Badii et al. (2021) explain that even when watched for entertainment, medical shows can help viewers engage emotionally with the characters and may prime them to be more receptive to training in medical ethics. There may be further applications to this type of education: the role of entertainment as a way of encouraging students to consider ethical situations could be extended to other professions, including law or even education.

Inadequate Paraphrase

When you paraphrase, your task is to distill the source's ideas in your own words. It's not enough to change a few words here and there and leave the rest; instead, you must completely restate the ideas in the passage in your own words. If your own language is too close to the original, then you are plagiarizing, even if you do provide a citation.

In order to make sure that you are using your own words, it's a good idea to put away the source material while you write your paraphrase of it. This way, you will force yourself to distill the point you think the author is making and articulate it in a new way. Once you have done this, you should look back at the original and make sure that you have represented the source’s ideas accurately and that you have not used the same words or sentence structure. If you do want to use some of the author's words for emphasis or clarity, you must put those words in quotation marks and provide a citation.

The passage below comes from Michael Sandel’s article, “The Case Against Perfection.” Here’s the article citation in MLA style:

Sandel, Michael. “The Case Against Perfection.” The Atlantic , April 2004, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/04/the-case-against-pe... .

Though there is much to be said for this argument, I do not think the main problem with enhancement and genetic engineering is that they undermine effort and erode human agency. The deeper danger is that they represent a kind of hyperagency—a Promethean aspiration to remake nature, including human nature, to serve our purposes and satisfy our desires. The problem is not the drift to mechanism but the drive to mastery. And what the drive to mastery misses and may even destroy is an appreciation of the gifted character of human powers and achievements.

The version below is an inadequate paraphrase because the student has only cut or replaced a few words: “I do not think the main problem” became “the main problem is not”; “deeper danger” became “bigger problem”; “aspiration” became “desire”; “the gifted character of human powers and achievements” became “the gifts that make our achievements possible.”

The main problem with enhancement and genetic engineering is not that they undermine effort and erode human agency. The bigger problem is that they represent a kind of hyperagency—a Promethean desire to remake nature, including human nature, to serve our purposes and satisfy our desires. The problem is not the drift to mechanism but the drive to mastery. And what the drive to mastery misses and may even destroy is an appreciation of the gifts that make our achievements possible (Sandel).

Acceptable version #1: Adequate paraphrase with citation

In this version, the student communicates Sandel’s ideas but does not borrow language from Sandel. Because the student uses Sandel’s name in the first sentence and has consulted an online version of the article without page numbers, there is no need for a parenthetical citation.

Michael Sandel disagrees with the argument that genetic engineering is a problem because it replaces the need for humans to work hard and make their own choices. Instead, he argues that we should be more concerned that the decision to use genetic enhancement is motivated by a desire to take control of nature and bend it to our will instead of appreciating its gifts.

Acceptable version #2: Direct quotation with citation

In this version, the student uses Sandel’s words in quotation marks and provides a clear MLA in-text citation. In cases where you are going to talk about the exact language that an author uses, it is acceptable to quote longer passages of text. If you are not going to discuss the exact language, you should paraphrase rather than quoting extensively.

The author argues that “the main problem with enhancement and genetic engineering is not that they undermine effort and erode human agency,” but, rather that “they represent a kind of hyperagency—a Promethean desire to remake nature, including human nature, to serve our purposes and satisfy our desires. The problem is not the drift to mechanism but the drive to mastery. And what the drive to mastery misses and may even destroy is an appreciation of the gifts that make our achievements possible” (Sandel).

Uncited Paraphrase

When you use your own language to describe someone else's idea, that idea still belongs to the author of the original material. Therefore, it's not enough to paraphrase the source material responsibly; you also need to cite the source, even if you have changed the wording significantly. As with quoting, when you paraphrase you are offering your reader a glimpse of someone else's work on your chosen topic, and you should also provide enough information for your reader to trace that work back to its original form. The rule of thumb here is simple: Whenever you use ideas that you did not think up yourself, you need to give credit to the source in which you found them, whether you quote directly from that material or provide a responsible paraphrase.

The passage below comes from C. Thi Nguyen’s article, “Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles.”

Here’s the citation for the article, in APA style:

Nguyen, C. (2020). Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles. Episteme, 17 (2), 141-161. doi:10.1017/epi.2018.32

Epistemic bubbles can easily form accidentally. But the most plausible explanation for the particular features of echo chambers is something more malicious. Echo chambers are excellent tools to maintain, reinforce, and expand power through epistemic control. Thus, it is likely (though not necessary) that echo chambers are set up intentionally, or at least maintained, for this functionality (Nguyen, 2020).

The student who wrote the paraphrase below has drawn these ideas directly from Nguyen’s article but has not credited the author. Although she paraphrased adequately, she is still responsible for citing Nguyen as the source of this information.

Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles have different origins. While epistemic bubbles can be created organically, it’s more likely that echo chambers will be formed by those who wish to keep or even grow their control over the information that people hear and understand.

In this version, the student eliminates any possible ambiguity about the source of the ideas in the paragraph. By using a signal phrase to name the author whenever the source of the ideas could be unclear, the student clearly attributes these ideas to Nguyen.

According to Nguyen (2020), echo chambers and epistemic bubbles have different origins. Nguyen argues that while epistemic bubbles can be created organically, it’s more likely that echo chambers will be formed by those who wish to keep or even grow their control over the information that people hear and understand.

Uncited Quotation

When you put source material in quotation marks in your essay, you are telling your reader that you have drawn that material from somewhere else. But it's not enough to indicate that the material in quotation marks is not the product of your own thinking or experimentation: You must also credit the author of that material and provide a trail for your reader to follow back to the original document. This way, your reader will know who did the original work and will also be able to go back and consult that work if they are interested in learning more about the topic. Citations should always go directly after quotations.

The passage below comes from Deirdre Mask’s nonfiction book, The Address Book: What Street Addresses Reveal About Identity, Race, Wealth, and Power.

Here is the MLA citation for the book:

Mask, Deirdre. The Address Book: What Street Addresses Reveal About Identity, Race, Wealth, and Power. St. Martin’s Griffin, 2021.

In New York, even addresses are for sale. The city allows a developer, for the bargain price of $11,000 (as of 2019), to apply to change the street address to something more attractive.

It’s not enough for the student to indicate that these words come from a source; the source must be cited:

After all, “in New York, even addresses are for sale. The city allows a developer, for the bargain price of $11,000 (as of 2019), to apply to change the street address to something more attractive.”

Here, the student has cited the source of the quotation using an MLA in-text citation:

After all, “in New York, even addresses are for sale. The city allows a developer, for the bargain price of $11,000 (as of 2019), to apply to change the street address to something more attractive” (Mask 229).

Using Material from Another Student's Work

In some courses you will be allowed or encouraged to form study groups, to work together in class generating ideas, or to collaborate on your thinking in other ways. Even in those cases, it's imperative that you understand whether all of your writing must be done independently, or whether group authorship is permitted. Most often, even in courses that allow some collaborative discussion, the writing or calculations that you do must be your own. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't collect feedback on your writing from a classmate or a writing tutor; rather, it means that the argument you make (and the ideas you rely on to make it) should either be your own or you should give credit to the source of those ideas.

So what does this mean for the ideas that emerge from class discussion or peer review exercises? Unlike the ideas that your professor offers in lecture (you should always cite these), ideas that come up in the course of class discussion or peer review are collaborative, and often not just the product of one individual's thinking. If, however, you see a clear moment in discussion when a particular student comes up with an idea, you should cite that student. In any case, when your work is informed by class discussions, it's courteous and collegial to include a discursive footnote in your paper that lets your readers know about that discussion. So, for example, if you were writing a paper about the narrator in Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried and you came up with your idea during a discussion in class, you might place a footnote in your paper that states the following: "I am indebted to the members of my Expos 20 section for sparking my thoughts about the role of the narrator as Greek Chorus in Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried ."

It is important to note that collaboration policies can vary by course, even within the same department, and you are responsible for familiarizing yourself with each course's expectation about collaboration. Collaboration policies are often stated in the syllabus, but if you are not sure whether it is appropriate to collaborate on work for any course, you should always consult your instructor.

• The Exception: Common Knowledge
• Other Scenarios to Avoid
• Why Does it Matter if You Plagiarize?
• How to Avoid Plagiarism
• Harvard University Plagiarism Policy

PDFs for This Section

• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Online Library and Citation Tools

Plagiarism in research

• Scientific Contribution
• Published: 04 July 2014
• Volume 18 , pages 91–101, ( 2015 )

Cite this article

• Gert Helgesson 1 &
• Stefan Eriksson 2  

11k Accesses

45 Citations

18 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Plagiarism is a major problem for research. There are, however, divergent views on how to define plagiarism and on what makes plagiarism reprehensible. In this paper we explicate the concept of “plagiarism” and discuss plagiarism normatively in relation to research. We suggest that plagiarism should be understood as “someone using someone else’s intellectual product (such as texts, ideas, or results), thereby implying that it is their own” and argue that this is an adequate and fruitful definition. We discuss a number of circumstances that make plagiarism more or less grave and the plagiariser more or less blameworthy. As a result of our normative analysis, we suggest that what makes plagiarism reprehensible as such is that it distorts scientific credit. In addition, intentional plagiarism involves dishonesty. There are, furthermore, a number of potentially negative consequences of plagiarism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Plagiarism in Philosophy Research

Only if the result of intellectual work is a novel idea about a way to process a certain task (a method) will it be possible to plagiarise by repeating the processes and not disclosing where the idea of doing it like that originated. Which is to say that (the idea of) a method may be plagiarised by using it and not disclosing that someone else came up with it, thereby implying that you invented it yourself.

It is, of course, not the writing that constitutes plagiarism in the context of ghost-writing, but the claim to have written or co-authored a text completely written by others.

It should be noted that it does not have to be the authors’ fault that a paper is misleading about who deserves credit. Leonard Fleck has brought to our attention instances of journals, unbeknown to the authors, having mistakenly removed references or quotation marks in the text, causing the text to give the impression that some phrases quoted from others are the authors’ own.

Our claims here regarding practices are based on anecdotic evidence only. However, based on our teaching about 500 doctoral students per year, and having heard this frequently in class, we believe this to be fairly common, or at least far from unique.

Anekwe, T.D. 2010. Profits and plagiarism: The case of medical ghostwriting. Bioethics 24(6): 267–272.

Article   Google Scholar  

Baždarić, K., L. Bilić-Zulle, G. Brumini, and M. Petrovečki. 2012. Prevalence of plagiarism in recent submissions to the Croatian Medical Journal. Science and Engineering Ethics 18: 223–239.

Brogan, M. 1992. Recycling ideas. College and Research Libraries 52(5): 453–464.

Bruton, S.V. 2014. Self-plagiarism and textual recycling: Legitimate forms of research misconduct. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance 21(3): 176–197.

Brülde, B., and P.-A. Tengland. 2003. Hälsa och sjukdom: en begreppslig utredning (Health and disease: A conceptual inquiry) . Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Google Scholar  

Butler, D. 2010. Journals step up plagiarism policing. Nature 466(7303): 167.

Chandrasoma, R., C. Thompson, and A. Pennycook. 2004. Beyond plagiarism: Transgressive and nontransgressive intertextuality. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 3(3): 171–193.

Couzin-Frankel, J., and J. Grom. 2009. Plagiarism sleuths. Science 324(5930): 1004–1007.

DeVoss, D., and A.C. Rosati. 2002. “It wasn’t me, was it?” Plagiarism and the web. Computers and Composition 19: 191–203.

Khan, B.A. 2011. Plagiarism: An academic theft. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Investigation 1(4): 255.

Pecorari, D. 2012. Textual plagiarism: How should it be regarded? Office of Research Integrity Newsletter 20(3): 3,10.

Rathod, S.D. 2012. Plagiarism: the human solution. Office of Research Integrity Newsletter 20(3): 1,7.

Roig, M. 2006. Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. Office of Research Integrity 2006. www.cse.msu.edu/~alexliu/plagiarism.pdf .

Samuelson, P. 1994. Self-plagiarism or fair use. Communications of the ACM 37(8): 21–25.

Sox, H. C. 2012. Plagiarism in the digital age. Office of Research Integrity Newsletter 20(3): 1,6.

Sun, Y.C. 2012. Does text readability matter? A study of paraphrasing and plagiarism in English as a foreign language writing context. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 21(2): 296–306.

Titus, S.L., J.A. Wells, and L.J. Rhoades. 2008. Repairing research integrity. Nature 453(7198): 980–982.

Vitse, C.L., and G.A. Poland. 2012. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, scientific misconduct and VACCINE: Protecting the science and the public. Vaccine 30(50): 7131–7133. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.08.053 .

Wager, L. 2011. How should editors respond to plagiarism? COPE discussion paper. 26th April, 2011. http://publicationethics.org/files/Discussion%20document.pdf .

Yilmaz, I. 2007. Plagiarism? No, we’re just borrowing better English. Nature 449(7163): 658.

Zhang, Y. 2010. Chinese journal finds 31% of submissions plagiarized. Nature 467(7312): 153.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the participants at seminars at Stockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics at Uppsala University, and at the International Bioethics retreat in Paris 2013 for valuable suggestions and constructive criticism of earlier versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Stockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden

Gert Helgesson

Centre for Research Ethics and Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Stefan Eriksson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gert Helgesson .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Helgesson, G., Eriksson, S. Plagiarism in research. Med Health Care and Philos 18 , 91–101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9583-8

Download citation

Published : 04 July 2014

Issue Date : February 2015

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9583-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Fabrication
• Intellectual contribution
• Scientific misconduct
• Scientific credit
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Plagiarism in research

Affiliation.

• 1 Department of Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Stockholm Centre for Healthcare Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden, [email protected].
• PMID: 24993050
• DOI: 10.1007/s11019-014-9583-8

Plagiarism is a major problem for research. There are, however, divergent views on how to define plagiarism and on what makes plagiarism reprehensible. In this paper we explicate the concept of "plagiarism" and discuss plagiarism normatively in relation to research. We suggest that plagiarism should be understood as "someone using someone else's intellectual product (such as texts, ideas, or results), thereby implying that it is their own" and argue that this is an adequate and fruitful definition. We discuss a number of circumstances that make plagiarism more or less grave and the plagiariser more or less blameworthy. As a result of our normative analysis, we suggest that what makes plagiarism reprehensible as such is that it distorts scientific credit. In addition, intentional plagiarism involves dishonesty. There are, furthermore, a number of potentially negative consequences of plagiarism.

• Ethical Analysis
• Ethics, Research*
• Plagiarism*

How to Avoid Plagiarism in Research Papers (Part 1)

Writing a research paper poses challenges in gathering literature and providing evidence for making your paper stronger. Drawing upon previously established ideas and values and adding pertinent information in your paper are necessary steps, but these need to be done with caution without falling into the trap of plagiarism . In order to understand how to avoid plagiarism , it is important to know the different types of plagiarism that exist.

What is Plagiarism in Research?

Plagiarism is the unethical practice of using words or ideas (either planned or accidental) of another author/researcher or your own previous works without proper acknowledgment. Considered as a serious academic and intellectual offense, plagiarism can result in highly negative consequences such as paper retractions and loss of author credibility and reputation. It is currently a grave problem in academic publishing and a major reason for paper retractions .

It is thus imperative for researchers to increase their understanding about plagiarism. In some cultures, academic traditions and nuances may not insist on authentication by citing the source of words or ideas. However, this form of validation is a prerequisite in the global academic code of conduct. Non-native English speakers  face a higher challenge of communicating their technical content in English as well as complying with ethical rules. The digital age too affects plagiarism. Researchers have easy access to material and data on the internet which makes it easy to copy and paste information.

Related: Conducting literature survey and wish to learn more about scientific misconduct? Check out this resourceful infographic today!

How Can You Avoid Plagiarism in a Research Paper?

Guard yourself against plagiarism, however accidental it may be. Here are some guidelines to avoid plagiarism.

1. Paraphrase your content

• Do not copy–paste the text verbatim from the reference paper. Instead, restate the idea in your own words.
• Understand the idea(s) of the reference source well in order to paraphrase correctly.
• Examples on good paraphrasing can be found here ( https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/QPA_paraphrase.html )

2. Use Quotations

Use quotes to indicate that the text has been taken from another paper. The quotes should be exactly the way they appear in the paper you take them from.

3. Cite your Sources – Identify what does and does not need to be cited

• The best way to avoid the misconduct of plagiarism is by self-checking your documents using plagiarism checker tools.
• Any words or ideas that are not your own but taken from another paper  need to be cited .
• Cite Your Own Material—If you are using content from your previous paper, you must cite yourself. Using material you have published before without citation is called self-plagiarism .
• The scientific evidence you gathered after performing your tests should not be cited.
• Facts or common knowledge need not be cited. If unsure, include a reference.

4. Maintain records of the sources you refer to

• Maintain records of the sources you refer to. Use citation software like EndNote or Reference Manager to manage the citations used for the paper
• Use multiple references for the background information/literature survey. For example, rather than referencing a review, the individual papers should be referred to and cited.

5. Use plagiarism checkers

You can use various plagiarism detection tools such as iThenticate or HelioBLAST (formerly eTBLAST) to see how much of your paper is plagiarised .

Tip: While it is perfectly fine to survey previously published work, it is not alright to paraphrase the same with extensive similarity. Most of the plagiarism occurs in the literature review section of any document (manuscript, thesis, etc.). Therefore, if you read the original work carefully, try to understand the context, take good notes, and then express it to your target audience in your own language (without forgetting to cite the original source), then you will never be accused with plagiarism (at least for the literature review section).

Caution: The above statement is valid only for the literature review section of your document. You should NEVER EVER use someone else’s original results and pass them off as yours!

What strategies do you adopt to maintain content originality? What advice would you share with your peers? Please feel free to comment in the section below.

If you would like to know more about patchwriting, quoting, paraphrasing and more, read the next article in this series!

Nice!! This article gives ideas to avoid plagiarism in a research paper and it is important in a research paper.

the article is very useful to me as a starter in research…thanks a lot!

it’s educative. what a wonderful article to me, it serves as a road map to avoid plagiarism in paper writing. thanks, keep your good works on.

I think this is very important topic before I can proceed with my M.A

it is easy to follow and understand

Nice!! These articles provide clear instructions on how to avoid plagiarism in research papers along with helpful tips.

Amazing and knowledgeable notes on plagiarism

Very helpful and educative, I have easily understood everything. Thank you so much.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Language & Grammar
• Reporting Research

Best Plagiarism Checker Tool for Researchers — Top 4 to choose from!

While common writing issues like language enhancement, punctuation errors, grammatical errors, etc. can be dealt…

How to Use Synonyms Effectively in a Sentence? — A way to avoid plagiarism!

Do you remember those school days when memorizing synonyms and antonyms played a major role…

• Manuscripts & Grants

Reliable and Affordable Plagiarism Detector for Students in 2022

Did you know? Our senior has received a rejection from a reputed journal! The journal…

• Publishing Research
• Submitting Manuscripts

3 Effective Tips to Make the Most Out of Your iThenticate Similarity Report

This guest post is drafted by an expert from iThenticate, a plagiarism checker trusted by the world’s…

How Can Researchers Avoid Plagiarism While Ensuring the Originality of Their Manuscript?

How Can Researchers Avoid Plagiarism While Ensuring the Originality of Their…

Is Your Reputation Safe? How to Ensure You’re Passing a Spotless Manuscript to Your…

Should the Academic Community Trust Plagiarism Detectors?

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

Training videos   |   Faqs

Plagiarism in Research – Definition, Types, Examples and Consequences

Plagiarism | Plagiarism Checkers | Paraphrasing Techniques | Scholarly Paraphraser

In this blog, we will discuss plagiarism in detail, its consequences, and techniques to avoid it. We will also look at different types of plagiarism using practical examples.

1. What is considered plagiarism?

Plagiarism occurs when you use someone else’s work without acknowledging the original author. Plagiarism is regarded as stealing and often leads to serious consequences and harsh punishment. This is usually found in several areas, especially academic writing, where concepts and statements are derived from an origin without proper citing.

2. What are the consequences of plagiarism?

Damage to student image: Schools usually include the ethics of their students in their academic records. Students who are found guilty of plagiarism are usually suspended or expelled from the schools, thereby causing the student not to be able to get into another school. 

Damage to professional image: A lot of people, including journalists, freelancers, and writing professionals, are usually impacted by the effect of plagiarism all their life. This has led many professionals to lose their jobs or get retrenched at their workplaces. Furthermore, this dent tends to go with them throughout their career, making it difficult to secure another job. 

3. Why do students plagiarize?

Following are some reasons why students plagiarize or cheat:

4. What are the different types of plagiarism?

5. what are some common examples of plagiarism, 6. a practical example of plagiarism in a paper.

Let’s look at some examples of Plagiarism.

More than 70% of papers rejected by scientific journals are written by non-native English speakers. Source text: Statement from paper by Elan et al. (2017)

This piece of text shown above is from a paper written by ‘Smith et al’. Now, the authors have used this statement in their paper as shown below. They have done the right thing by citing the source at the end of the statement. The mistake here is that since they have used the exact text from the paper, they must enclose them in quotes. This will be considered plagiarism.

More than 70% of papers rejected by scientific journals are written by non-native English speakers. (Elan et al. , 2017) Incorrect: Unaltered text not it quotes and hence it will be considered plagiarism

So the correct way to do this will be to put the text in quotation marks and then reference the paper.

As Smith et al. (2017) state: “More than 70% of papers rejected by scientific journals are written by non-native English speakers”. Correct: Proper way to quote the paper

It is generally not advisable to use a lot of unaltered text from other papers and put them in quotes in your paper. You should only use the exact text from someone’s work if you think it is important to be precise.  This can include things like a philosopher’s statement or definition of something. Most referees and supervisors expect you to understand the work and then write them in your own words. In the example below the authors have paraphrased the text and then cited the paper, this is how it should be done.

Manuscripts authored by non-native English speakers are rejected by scientific publications 70% of the time. (Smith et al., 2017) Correct: Text paraphrased and source cited (the recommended way)

7. What is self-plagiarism?

Self plagiarism occurs when you use a piece of text from your own published work in a new paper that you are writing. You might ask, what is the problem? It is my work and why can’t I use it again in a different paper? The problem is that once you publish your work, the copyright for the text belongs to the publisher, you cannot use the unaltered text from your old paper in your new paper. You have to paraphrase your text if you want to use the same content in your new paper. 

Self-plagiarism even applies to figures, if you want to reuse a figure from your old paper in your new paper exactly as it is, you have to get permission from the publisher of your old paper. If the publisher does not give you permission, then you should modify it.

8. Simulateneous submission to multiple journals

Another serious type of self-plagiarism is submitting exactly the same paper to multiple journals. You cannot do this. When you submit your paper to a journal you will be signing an agreement that clearly states that “the work in question has not been published before and is not under submission at any other journal” . If you submit the same manuscript to multiple journals, then, it is a violation of the ethical standards of publishing. You must submit your paper to a journal first and wait for the outcome. If the paper gets rejected, then submit your paper to another journal. Keep repeating the process until you get your work published.

9. How do you avoid plagiarism?

There are numerous ways to avoid plagiarism in your academic and professional work. Below are the top hints to avoid plagiarism:

10. Frequently asked questions about plagiarism

Plagiarism is when you make use of someone else’s work without acknowledging that they own it.

There are numerous methods and citation formats you can use when referencing sources.

Several academic disciplines and publishers have developed a number of standards for citing sources, including IEEE, Havard, MLA, APA, and Chicago.

If you are unclear about the acceptable citation style for your research paper, consult your instructor or read the journal instructions. The proper format to employ while composing your Bibliography or List of Works Cited is provided by citation style guides.

The fundamental bibliographic data needed is the same regardless of your chosen citation style. Don’t forget to gather these data as your research advances.

• For books, include the following information: author, title, publisher, and year of publication.
• For journals, author, article title, journal title, volume, issue, date, page numbers, and doi or permalink are required.
• Author, page title, web address or URL, and access date are required for web page resources.

Finally, use a good referencing tool to manage your references and generate bibliography.

Here are some techniques for paraphrasing the text to avoid plagiarism.

• You read the text out loud and understand the meaning
• You write down your paraphrase
• Confirm that your writeup aligns with the original text.

You can also use academic paraphrasing tools to paraphrase your text and plagiarism detection tools to identify plagiarism in your text.

Yes! Self-plagiarism occurs when you make use of your previous write-up in a new one, but this can be avoided if the previous write-up is properly cited and paraphrased.

Similar Posts

Self-Plagiarism – Similarity Checker Tool to Avoid Academic Misconduct

In this blog, we explain the differences between self-plagiarism and plain plagiarism, and demonstrate the benefits of Ref-n-write’s similarity checker tool.

Plagiarism Checker and Plagiarism Detector Tools – A Review of Free and Paid Tools

In this blog, we review the most popular plagiarism checking tools available in the market from the perspective of cost and ease of use.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• 4 Share Facebook
• 7 Share Twitter
• 8 Share LinkedIn
• 5 Share Email

Free plagiarism checker by EasyBib

Check for plagiarism, grammar errors, and more.

• Expert Check

Check for accidental plagiarism

Avoid unintentional plagiarism. Check your work against billions of sources to ensure complete originality.

Find and fix grammar errors

Turn in your best work. Our smart proofreader catches even the smallest writing mistakes so you don't have to.

Get expert writing help

Improve the quality of your paper. Receive feedback on your main idea, writing mechanics, structure, conclusion, and more.

What students are saying about us

"Caught comma errors that I actually struggle with even after proofreading myself."

- Natasha J.

"I find the suggestions to be extremely helpful especially as they can instantly take you to that section in your paper for you to fix any and all issues related to the grammar or spelling error(s)."

- Catherine R.

Check for unintentional plagiarism

Easily check your paper for missing citations and accidental plagiarism with the EasyBib plagiarism checker. The EasyBib plagiarism checker:

• Scans your paper against billions of sources.
• Identifies text that may be flagged for plagiarism.
• Provides you with a plagiarism score.

You can submit your paper at any hour of the day and quickly receive a plagiarism report.

What is the EasyBib plagiarism checker? 

Most basic plagiarism checkers review your work and calculate a percentage, meaning how much of your writing is indicative of original work. But, the EasyBib plagiarism checker goes way beyond a simple percentage. Any text that could be categorized as potential plagiarism is highlighted, allowing you time to review each warning and determine how to adjust it or how to cite it correctly.

You’ll even see the sources against which your writing is compared and the actual word for word breakdown. If you determine that a warning is unnecessary, you can waive the plagiarism check suggestion.

Plagiarism is unethical because it doesn’t credit those who created the original work; it violates intellectual property and serves to benefit the perpetrator. It is a severe enough academic offense, that many faculty members use their own plagiarism checking tool for their students’ work. With the EasyBib Plagiarism checker, you can stay one step ahead of your professors and catch citation mistakes and accidental plagiarism before you submit your work for grading.

Why use a plagiarism checker? 

Imagine – it’s finals week and the final research paper of the semester is due in two days. You, being quite familiar with this high-stakes situation, hit the books, and pull together a ten-page, last-minute masterpiece using articles and materials from dozens of different sources.

However, in those late, coffee-fueled hours, are you fully confident that you correctly cited all the different sources you used? Are you sure you didn’t accidentally forget any? Are you confident that your teacher’s plagiarism tool will give your paper a 0% plagiarism score?

That’s where the EasyBib plagiarism checker comes in to save the day. One quick check can help you address all the above questions and put your mind at ease.

What exactly is plagiarism? 

Plagiarism has a number of possible definitions; it involves more than just copying someone else’s work. Improper citing, patchworking, and paraphrasing could all lead to plagiarism in one of your college assignments. Below are some common examples of accidental plagiarism that commonly occur.

Quoting or paraphrasing without citations

Not including in-text citations is another common type of accidental plagiarism. Quoting is taking verbatim text from a source. Paraphrasing is when you’re using another source to take the same idea but put it in your own words. In both cases, it’s important to always cite where those ideas are coming from. The EasyBib plagiarism checker can help alert you to when you need to accurately cite the sources you used.

Patchwork plagiarism

When writing a paper, you’re often sifting through multiple sources and tabs from different search engines. It’s easy to accidentally string together pieces of sentences and phrases into your own paragraphs. You may change a few words here and there, but it’s similar to the original text. Even though it’s accidental, it is still considered plagiarism. It’s important to clearly state when you’re using someone else’s words and work.

Improper citations

Depending on the class, professor, subject, or teacher, there are multiple correct citation styles and preferences. Some examples of common style guides that are followed for citations include MLA, APA, and Chicago style. When citing resources, it’s important to cite them accurately. Incorrect citations could make it impossible for a reader to track down a source and it’s considered plagiarism. There are EasyBib citation tools to help you do this.

Don’t fall victim to plagiarism pitfalls. Most of the time, you don’t even mean to commit plagiarism; rather, you’ve read so many sources from different search engines that it gets difficult to determine an original thought or well-stated fact versus someone else’s work. Or worse, you assume a statement is common knowledge, when in fact, it should be attributed to another author.

When in doubt, cite your source!

Time for a quick plagiarism quiz! 

Which of the following requires a citation?

• A chart or graph from another source
• A paraphrase of an original source
• Several sources’ ideas summarized into your own paragraph
• A direct quote
• All of the above

If you guessed option E than you’d be correct. Correct punctuation and citation of another individual’s ideas, quotes, and graphics are a pillar of good academic writing.

What if you copy your own previous writing?

Resubmitting your own original work for another class’s assignment is a form of self-plagiarism, so don’t cut corners in your writing. Draft an original piece for each class or ask your professor if you can incorporate your previous research.

What features are available with the EasyBib plagiarism checker? 

Along with providing warnings and sources for possible plagiarism, the EasyBib  plagiarism checker works alongside the other EasyBib tools, including a grammar checker  and a spell checker . You’ll receive personalized feedback on your thesis and writing structure too!

The  plagiarism checker compares your writing sample with billions of available sources online so that it detects plagiarism at every level. You’ll be notified of which phrases are too similar to current research and literature, prompting a possible rewrite or additional citation. You’ll also get feedback on your paper’s inconsistencies, such as changes in text, formatting, or style. These small details could suggest possible plagiarism within your assignment.

And speaking of citations, there are also  EasyBib citation tools  available. They help you quickly build your bibliography and avoid accidental plagiarism. Make sure you know which citation format your professor prefers!

Great! How do I start? 

Simply copy and paste or upload your essay into the checker at the top of this page. You’ll receive the first five grammar suggestions for free! To try the plagiarism checker for free, start your EasyBib Plus three-day free trial.* If you love the product and decide to opt for premium services, you’ll have access to unlimited writing suggestions and personalized feedback.

The EasyBib plagiarism checker is conveniently available 24 hours a day and seven days a week. You can cancel anytime.  Check your paper for free today!.

*See Terms and Conditions

Visit www.easybib.com for more information on helpful EasyBib writing and citing tools.

For informational guides and on writing and citing, visit the EasyBib guides homepage .

• Agriculture Scholarly Research Databases
• Tips for Utilizing Scholarly Databases
• Evaluating the Resources That You've Found
• Requesting Materials & Interlibrary Loan
• Find Images for your Presentations
• Find Extension Resources, Newspapers, Trade Publications, Data, Reports, and More
• Citing Images in Your Presentations
• Citation Management Applications

Self-Guided Plagiarism Tutorial

Common and uncommon forms of plagiarism, tips for avoiding plagiarism.

The following self-guided tutorial will assist you with understanding the various forms of plagiarism:

https://wsu.libwizard.com/f/agri587

Plagiarism is the act of taking the work, opinion, content, or idea of a person or program (e.g. AI)  and either passing it off as your own or not clearly acknowledging the original source. . Plagiarism can be intentional or unintentional.

Why is this important?

•  Each person deserves the rewards and the recognition for their intellectual creations
• Plagiarism protections help foster further creativity
• Understanding plagiarism protects you from failing grades, accusations of malfeasance, and/or looking sloppy

So let's look at some of the common, and uncommon, forms of plagiarism

Copying content from another researcher or AI program without properly attributing it If you take the ideas or content of another person or AI program and utilize it in your paper you must cite the creator. This can include copying just one or two sentences. You can also not utilize the ideas or concepts of another person or program without citing that. The golden rule for citing ideas or opinions is that If you had to look it up then you need to cite it.

Furthermore, plagiarism can occur by improperly citing a resource. For example, if you improperly cited a research publication, author, or other important information, this would be a type of plagiarism. 

Having improper or misleading citations Plagiarism can also technically occur through sloppy citations or incorrectly citing a source. Here are some different types of source-based plagiarism.

• A researcher cites the wrong source 
• A researcher uses a secondary source of information, but only cites the primary source. For example, if you are reading an article and the author cites another study that you also want to cite, you must review that original study and not assume the author that you are reading is summarizing and citing that research correctly.
• Data misrepresentation and falsification can also be a form of plagiarism. 

Here are some tips to avoid plagiarism. 

Tip 1: Cite sources and make sure your citations are accurate. When in doubt, cite. Also ask your instructor or a librarian for assistance when needed.

Tip 2: Keep your citations organized. Staying organized can go a long way in avoiding plagiarism. There are free citation management applications that can assist you with keeping organized. For example, Zotero, Mendeley, and EndNote all offer citation management assistance. Click this link to learn more about citation management applications .

Tip 3: Never copy and paste the work of someone else into your paper with the expectation that you'll fix it or properly cite it at a later time. Many esteemed researchers and writers have fallen into this trap, forgotten to edit their paper later, and found themselves embroiled in a plagiarism scandal. 

Tip 4: Do not read the summary of a research article via a secondary source and than cite the original article as if you read it. For example, if you find a researcher talking about a research article, such as in a literature review section, do not cite that original article until you have read and evaluated it. The same goes with data sets. 

Tip 5: Proofread your paper. Ask yourself:

• Are my citations consistent? Do they adhere to the citation format that I'm using (such as APA)?
• Is the idea or opinion that I'm presenting my own or is it something that I read elsewhere?
• Is every in-text citation included in the reference section?
• Did I thoroughly read the assignment?

Tip 6: Cite everything you are borrowing, not just research. For example, if you are using images, multimedia, charts, and data you must cite that as well.

Tip 7: When in doubt, ask a librarian or your instructor.

• << Previous: Citation Management Applications
• Last Updated: Apr 18, 2024 4:16 PM
• URL: https://libguides.libraries.wsu.edu/agri587

An official website of the United States government

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.

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.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Plagiarism, Cheating and Research Integrity: Case Studies from a Masters Program in Peru

Andres m. carnero.

1 School of Public Health and Administration, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

Percy Mayta-Tristan

2 School of Medicine, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Peru

Kelika A. Konda

3 David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Edward Mezones-Holguin

Antonio bernabe-ortiz.

4 CRONICAS, Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

German F. Alvarado

Carlos canelo-aybar, jorge l. maguiña.

5 Department of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru

Eddy R. Segura

Antonio m. quispe.

6 Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

Edward S. Smith

7 School of Medicine, Universidad San Martin de Porres, Lima, Peru

Angela M. Bayer

Andres g. lescano.

Plagiarism is a serious, yet widespread type of research misconduct, and is often neglected in developing countries. Despite its far-reaching implications, plagiarism is poorly acknowledged and discussed in the academic setting, and insufficient evidence exists in Latin America and developing countries to inform the development of preventive strategies. In this context, we present a longitudinal case study of seven instances of plagiarism and cheating arising in four consecutive classes (2011–2014) of an Epidemiology Masters program in Lima, Peru, and describes the implementation and outcomes of a multifaceted, “zero-tolerance” policy aimed at introducing research integrity. Two cases involved cheating in graded assignments, and five cases correspond to plagiarism in the thesis protocol. Cases revealed poor awareness of high tolerance to plagiarism, poor academic performance, and widespread writing deficiencies, compensated with patchwriting and copy-pasting. Depending on the events’ severity, penalties included course failure (6/7) and separation from the program (3/7). Students at fault did not engage in further plagiarism. Between 2011 and 2013, the Masters program sequentially introduced a preventive policy consisting of: (i) intensified research integrity and scientific writing education, (ii) a stepwise, cumulative writing process; (iii) honor codes; (iv) active search for plagiarism in all academic products; and (v) a “zero-tolerance” policy in response to documented cases. No cases were detected in 2014. In conclusion, plagiarism seems to be widespread in resource-limited settings and a greater response with educational and zero-tolerance components is needed to prevent it.

Science aims at expanding knowledge through systematic generation and testing of hypotheses, which can then be used for the benefit of humanity. To achieve this goal, science is guided by several values, including objectivity, honesty and unselfishness ( Allchin 1999 ; Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy et al. 2009 ). Disregard to these values can result in research misconduct ( Steneck 2006 ; Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy et al. 2009 ), which distorts the scientific record, wastes resources, and undermines the trust of society in science ( Steneck 2006 ). Plagiarism, the misappropriation of other’s intellectual contribution, is a serious form of research misconduct, and probably one of the most frequently reported type of research misconduct ( Smith 2000 ). Despite the challenges in ascertaining the true frequency of plagiarism, recent estimates (around 2 %) suggest that it is much more common than previously thought ( Pupovac and Fanelli 2015 ). However, this high frequency compared to other forms of research misconduct may partially result from enhanced detection by electronic methods.

Plagiarism can occur at any point in the career of a researcher, but it is more frequently reported in the early stages ( Martinson et al. 2005 ), and relatively few studies have explored its origins during undergraduate and early post-graduate research ( Swazey et al. 1993 ; Wadja-Johnston et al. 2001 ; Krstic 2015 ). Early training stages may constitute a critical period to prevent plagiarism, when students begin to actively engage in research. If uncorrected, plagiarism and cheating may continue throughout the researcher’s career, and can potentially lead to other misconduct ( Lovett-Hopper et al. 2007 ; Park 2003 ). During training, plagiarism can become part of a broader set of dishonest behaviors aimed at obtaining undeserved academic advantage (such as copying in an exam, taking credit for another’s work, and prohibited collaboration between students), which are collectively termed “cheating” ( Park 2003 ).

Plagiarism is a global problem, yet evidence of its occurrence comes almost exclusively from developed countries ( Ana et al. 2013 ). Studies exploring plagiarism in developing countries are critically needed ( Ana et al. 2013 ), given that cultural and economic factors may affect the perception of and engagement in plagiarism ( Davis 2003 ; Martin 2012 ). In developing countries, several unique factors may enable plagiarism such as: (i) lack of training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (ii) poor development of writing skills ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (iii) tolerance to misconduct during education and professional activities ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ); (iv) lack of institutional policies and oversight of academic centers and journals ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ); (v) differing perceptions of intellectual property and misconduct ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (vi) the pervasive effect of corruption ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ); and (vii) cultural differences in values ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ). Discussing plagiarism in Latin America is an important issue, given the dramatic growth of research activities in the region in the last two decades ( Van Noorden 2014 ; Catanzaro et al. 2014 ). In particular, sporadic reports have highlighted the occurrence of plagiarism in research conducted in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ), and the reaction of scientific journals ( Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ; Almeida et al. 2015 ). In addition, Latin American countries share many cultural features, arising from their common colonial history, that may affect how plagiarism and cheating are perceived ( Martin 2012 ; Salter and Guffey 2001 ), including collectivism, high uncertainty avoidance, high power distance, high indulgence, and a short-term orientation ( Hofstede 2011 ). Finally, the fact that Latin American countries share a common language (mainly Spanish, but also Portuguese, which are closely related) and culture may facilitate the development of effective control strategies with the potential to reach >10 % of the world’s population. Despite its importance, plagiarism has not been systematically studied in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ), and little evidence exists on its frequency, determinants, and consequences in the Latin American setting. In particular, there is a lack of evidence about the implementation of effective, affordable, and context-specific interventions targeted at preventing plagiarism and promoting research and academic integrity among research students in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ).

In this article, we present a case study of seven instances of plagiarism and cheating detected between 2011 and 2014 in our Masters program in Epidemiologic Research in Lima, Peru, that receives students from a broad range of countries in Latin America. We also describe the implementation and outcomes of a feasible, low-cost, “zero tolerance” policy tailored to promote research integrity among postgraduate research students in Latin America.

The Program

The Masters in Epidemiologic Research of Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia is a postgraduate program offered annually since 2007 in Peru. The program aims at training epidemiologists capable of designing and executing high-quality research and publishing in top-tier peer-reviewed international journals. It was created jointly by Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH), the leading university in biomedical research in Peru ( SCImago Research Group 2015 ), and the U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6 (NAMRU-6), and was created with funding from the Fogarty International Center (grant 2D43 TW007393). The courses are structured in four 10-week terms, and an overall coursework of 10 months. It is coordinated and taught almost entirely by young scientists with international graduate training, many of them doctorates from U.S. and European universities. The core coursework includes three series of courses taught in each of the four terms of the program, progressively advancing into more complex topics: Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Methods. Additional compulsory courses address complementary research topics: Outbreak investigation (Term 1), Epidemiologic surveillance (Term 2), Validation of instruments (Term 2), Health situation analysis (Term 3), Qualitative research (Term 3), Program evaluation (Term 4), and Writing research proposals (Term 4). Topics on career-advancement are discussed as part of the Research Methods I-IV courses. Since 2013, the program is offered by the UPCH School of Public Health and Administration, whereas past editions were offered by the School of Medicine (2007–2009) and the School of Postgraduate Studies (2010–2012). Academic and research misconduct are critically important issues, and lectures addressing RCR, research ethics, and scientific writing have been part of the program since its inception. Students also complete the CITI research ethics course early in the program ( Braunschweiger and Goodman 2007 ; Litewka et al. 2008 ). Contents on research integrity have evolved in time, expanding the discussion of plagiarism, responsible authorship, and adequate referencing as needed ( Table 1 ). Each class has 20–30 students, usually junior researchers with a biomedical background from local research groups, governmental agencies and clinical/medical centers. Since 2011, the program has received an increasing number of international students from countries in South and Central America and the Caribbean.

Summary of RCR and scientific writing contents in the Masters in Epidemiologic Research Program curriculum (2011–2013), Lima, Peru

CITI Collaborative institutional training initiative ( www.citiprogram.org ), IRB institutional review board

Case Studies

We present here all seven cases of plagiarism and cheating discovered between the fourth (2011) and seventh (2014) classes of the Masters program, although other cases probably remained undetected because of limited surveillance, particularly before 2011. The information presented is based on the experiences of faculty directly handling the cases. All conversations with the students at fault took place in private settings, and class discussions about the events preserved their anonymity. All cases are described as male here to further support anonymity. Figure 1 summarizes key information of the cases and the response measures implemented by our program.

Timeline of cases of academic misconduct in the Masters in Epidemiologic Research Program (2011–2013), Lima, Peru

Cheating Case 1: Epidemiology I Course, April 2011

During the first term Epidemiology course, students were asked to complete a brief individual take-home assignment consisting of short-answer questions, and e-mail their responses to the teaching assistant (TA). Explicit instructions regarding the individual nature of the assignment were given and no discussion was allowed between students. One hour before the deadline, the TA received an e-mail with a student’s homework attached, which had been shared with the rest of the class:

Hi guys! Continuing with the love chain!!!! Hahahaha. I’m sending Epi’s exercise 2, for those of you that are on a tight schedule … please let me know if you find anything wrong!:) ….

The student’s behavior violated the standards of conduct by sharing individual work and requesting review of an individual assignment by other students. The event was immediately communicated to the course and program coordinators, and was discussed with the class 3 h later, preserving the anonymity of the student involved in the case. During the discussion, the class tried to minimize the importance of the event, and faculty required substantial effort to explain that the incident constituted severe academic misconduct and would not be tolerated. Coordinators evaluated potential sanctions to both the student who shared the assignment and the whole class, given that no student reported the incident. Finally, the coordinators decided jointly to fail the student on the assignment, and initiate disciplinary probation for the rest of the academic year. Penalty to the class was waived, given the short time students had to report the event (3 h). Additional sessions to discuss plagiarism and research integrity were added to the curricula. Given that the incident occurred early in the academic year, no information exists regarding the student’s academic performance prior to the incident. The student completed all the required coursework that year under close supervision and intensive counseling, maintaining a low academic performance (ranked 18 of 22), without any evidence of further misconduct.

Plagiarism Case 1: Research Methods I Course, May 2011

A student’s final assignment (first draft of the thesis proposal) exhibited highly heterogeneous writing, with clear and well-written sections interspersed with less-developed sections and poorly presented arguments. In addition, some of the cited material was unrelated to the sources quoted, and the text included uncommon terminology (e.g. general practitioners were referred as “generalist physicians”). The coordinator searched the suspiciously-written sections in Google ® , as described by Rojas-Revoredo et al. (2007) . Several paragraphs were found to be unacknowledged verbatim fragments of published articles. The next day, the course and program coordinator met at the student’s workplace to discuss the incident with the student in private. After initial denial, the student finally accepted committing plagiarism, and was failed in the course and separated from the program for the rest of the year. The university authorities were informed and a misconduct report was filed in the student’s permanent academic record. In addition, the student was warned that consideration of future readmission was conditional on preparing an RCR guide for future students. The incident was discussed with the class at the beginning of the second term and substantial knowledge gaps and ambivalence towards plagiarism were noted. Plagiarism was thoroughly discussed, and five writing workshops were added to each term, at the class’ request. The student contacted the program coordinator in 2012 and was readmitted to the program after completing the required material. Prior to the event, the student had poor performance (ranked 29 of 30). After readmission, the student completed all the required courses under close monitoring and intensive counselling, exhibiting average performance (ranked 16 of 30), and without evidence of any further incidents. After this incident, a paragraph describing plagiarism and its potential sanctions (including course failure) was added to the syllabi of all courses.

Plagiarism Cases 2 and 3: Research Methods II Course, July 2011

The final assignment (final draft of the thesis proposal) of two separate students presented evidence highly suggestive of plagiarism. One case exhibited partial use of quotation marks, while the other presented evidence of self-plagiarism. After searching for the suspicious fragments in the web, plagiarism and self-plagiarism were confirmed. Upon confrontation, both students initially denied the events, but eventually one accepted the misconduct, while the student who committed self-plagiarism did not accept having engaged in any misbehavior. Both students were failed in the course, separated from the program for the rest of the year, and the event was notified to the School of Postgraduate Studies. Two weeks later, the student who did not admit fault contacted the university authorities to start legal action. The authorities from the School of Postgraduate Studies discussed the case in depth with the program coordinator and endorsed program’s decision. Finally, the student desisted from taking legal action, and contacted the program in early 2013 to inquire about readmission, but did not complete the re-admission process. Both students had low academic performance in the program (ranked 26 out of 27). The other student was readmitted in 2012 but exhibited poor performance (ranked 26 of 26), and has not completed all the required coursework yet. The event was discussed with the class, and some students argued that throughout their education they repeatedly witnessed and resorted to similar behavior without any indication that it constituted a dishonest practice. One student even mentioned that a mentor in medical residency once said: “all has been written already, (publishing) only requires putting the pieces together”, which seemed to be an invitation to plagiarize. Starting the following year, all students were required to sign an integrity agreement accepting to avoid plagiarism, disclose any misconduct cases witnessed (whistle-blowing) and acknowledge that failure to do so would make them accomplices. The document also specified the potential sanctions for such behaviors. Finally, content on RCR, responsible authorship, plagiarism and adequate referencing was thoroughly enhanced in the first term Research Methods course.

Cheating Case 2: Biostatistics I Course, April 2012

On April 2012, during an individual quiz, two students turned in identical solutions, even with the same variable names and Stata ® code. The next day, the TA and course coordinator interviewed both students, one of which admitted having requested repeatedly the exam to the other student, whom eventually shared the answers. One day later, the program coordinator received an e-mail from the student apologizing for the misconduct, accepting all the responsibility for the incident, relieving the other student from any liability, and resigning from the program. The e-mail was promptly answered with the indication that resignation from the program was not possible, as the student was going to be expelled from the program. The School of Postgraduate Studies was then notified about this event, and the student was expelled from the program. After extensive discussion among the coordinators, the student that shared the exam was failed in the exam with a grade of zero, and was allowed to continue in the program at the end of the term. As the program had just started, no evidence is available on the academic performance of the two students prior to this event. The student that shared the exam eventually failed the Research Methods IV course, nearly failing the program due to low academic performance (ranked 19 of 20). No evidence exists of involvement in further events. An 8-week Research Integrity course was added to the first term’s curriculum the following year, addressing extensively research integrity, RCR, plagiarism and appropriate referencing, among other topics.

Plagiarism Case 4: Research Methods III Course, October 2013

The introduction section of a thesis proposal contained passages highly suggestive of plagiarism. After searching for these sections in Google ® , literal plagiarism from research articles and the web was confirmed. Upon questioning by the course and program coordinator, the student admitted committing plagiarism, albeit without realizing that it constituted misconduct. The student was failed in the course, and the incident was discussed anonymously with the rest of the class, reiterating the severity of plagiarism and how to avoid it. Also, students were warned that any further plagiarism cases would be expelled from the program. Until the event occurred, the student had very low academic performance (ranked 26 of 26). The student completed the rest of the program’s coursework under close monitoring and intensive counseling, with low performance (ranked 25 of 25), and was not involved in other misconduct incidents.

Plagiarism Case 5: Research Methods III Course, October 2013

One week after the class discussion of the previous case of plagiarism, the final assignment of a student (full thesis proposal) had several sections strongly suggestive of literal plagiarism. A Google ® search evidenced that these paragraphs were identical to the content of several websites, including Wikipedia ® . The program and course coordinator discussed the incident with the student, and after a long explanation of the definition of plagiarism, the student recognized having plagiarized inadvertently. Given the thorough discussion of plagiarism in the Research Integrity course, writing workshops, and the previous plagiarism case a week before, the student was failed in the course and separated from the program for the rest of the year. The event was reported to the university, and a misconduct report was filed in the student’s permanent academic record. When given the opportunity to address the class, the student described the case, accepted all responsibility for having plagiarized, and warned the class about the severity and importance of preventing plagiarism. The class recognized the severity of the event, but unanimously asked for a more lenient sanction, arguing that the student may have missed prior warnings. Despite accepting misconduct, the student argued the sanction was too harsh and presented a notarized letter requesting a formal decision. The student’s work supervisors contacted the program coordinator in coordination with the student, inquiring about the incident and the program’s response, and full details were provided. The university confirmed the sanction imposed by the program and the student recently contacted the program to try to finish the coursework. Prior to the event, the student had a low performance (ranked 24 of 26).

Most of the cases of plagiarism and cheating detected involved students with a record of suboptimal academic performance in the program. Indeed, 20 % of students in the lowest quartile of their class were involved in plagiarism and cheating compared to only 2 % of students in higher grade quartiles (risk ratio = 12.2; 95 % confidence interval: 2.5–60.2, Fisher’s exact p value = 0.008). Also, none of the four cases described above who actually completed their coursework later had successfully defended their dissertations. No cases were detected in the 2014 class, which suggests a very strong impact of the policy implemented, despite the fact that the reduction in the incidence of plagiarism and cheating is only marginally significant (Fisher’s exact p value = 0.187).

Discussion In three consecutive annual classes of our Epidemiology Masters in Peru, we detected five cases of plagiarism and two cases of cheating, including literal plagiarism, self-plagiarism, inappropriate sharing of work, and appropriation of other students’ work. We believe that these are not isolated events, but rather the manifestation of a widespread and frequent misconduct that has probably gone undetected beyond our program. This is consistent with the high rates of cheating and plagiarism reported worldwide among high school and undergraduate students ( McCabe 2005 ; McCabe et al. 2001 ), including students of medical and allied health sciences ( Rennie and Crosby 2001 ; Taradi et al. 2010 ). It is likely that plagiarism and cheating may originate in high school and undergraduate education, and continue to graduate education. Thus, the widespread occurrence of plagiarism at all levels of education suggests that prevention, detection and response to plagiarism should hold a much higher priority in academic institutions in contexts like Peru and Latin America.

Students committing plagiarism and cheating shared several predisposing characteristics, including poor awareness of research integrity and plagiarism, widespread deficiencies in writing and referencing skills, poor academic performance, and a high tolerance to plagiarism. However, a significant portion of the rest of the class also shared a limited awareness of research integrity and tolerance to plagiarism, and many students had difficulty in grasping research integrity concepts. This is consistent with previous reports evidencing insufficient knowledge of RCR and plagiarism in graduate students in the U.S., particularly among international graduates ( Heitman et al. 2007 ; Ryan et al. 2009 ). These knowledge gaps may be particularly severe in Latin America, where shortcomings in higher education neglect the discussion of plagiarism and academic and research integrity. In addition, lack of development of analytic and writing skills may lead some students to use plagiarism as a maladaptive, compensatory writing strategy. The situation is further complicated by a widespread tolerance to plagiarism throughout the education system in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ). In Peru, for example, the National Assembly of Rectors reduced the sanction of two undergraduate law students guilty of literal plagiarism from a semester suspension to a simple reprimand, arguing that “copying without indicating the source is a natural behavior in students” ( Tantaleán Odar 2014 ), and that “teaching consists fundamentally in a constant repetition of external ideas, often omitting the sources for brevity” ( Tantaleán Odar 2014 ). Furthermore, several authors have reported that a large proportion of undergraduate research and approved theses contain plagiarism ( Saldana-Gastulo et al. 2010 ; Huamani et al. 2008 ). The synergic effect of limited awareness of plagiarism, RCR, and scientific writing, and the widespread tolerance to plagiarism highlights the need to couple intensive anti-plagiarism education with stronger response policies.

Any attempt to expunge plagiarism is unlikely to succeed without institutional commitment with scientific integrity ( Whitley and Keith-Spiegel 2001 ; Park 2004 ). Institutions should have a transparent, comprehensive and uniformly applied policy that is embedded in a context of promotion of academic integrity. UPCH has an established institutional policy against academic misconduct, which is supplemented by the regulations of each school ( Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia 2009 ). However, such a framework focuses almost exclusively on punitive aspects, neglecting preventive and detection strategies. Additionally, regulations have not been widely disseminated and/or discussed across the university’s academic programs, and their application seems inconsistent across programs. Nevertheless, our findings are probably not an isolated case, as lack of comprehensive policies against and widespread tolerance to plagiarism appear to be nearly universal in educational institutions in countries such as Peru. Thus, the institutions’ commitment and proactivity to address plagiarism is critical for the implementation of any effective and sustainable intervention against cases of plagiarism in the future. As a program, we are disappointed to see our students falling due to misconduct, but are not embarrassed to admit we had these issues. We believe many other programs face the same challenges and should come forward to admit it openly and therefore create greater awareness and response.

In this complex scenario, we adopted a “zero tolerance” policy against plagiarism ( Titus et al. 2008 ), in which we actively searched for potential research misconduct and all suspected cases are reported, investigated and sanctioned as dictated by the severity of the case. Although there is no current consensus worldwide on the best way to respond to plagiarism findings, we believe that a zero tolerance approach is the most acceptable alternative, as it results in a clear, strong message that plagiarism and other forms of research misconduct are wrong and can never be justified. In low-resource settings, resource constraints and dependence on external funding may discourage investigating apparently “mild” cases to avoid the associated costs and potential damages in reputation. However, the long term adverse consequences of tolerating plagiarism and therefore graduating student with poor RCR knowledge, outweigh any of these short term apparent benefits. None of the students who committed/attempted plagiarism were known to engage in further events during the program and no additional misconduct events have been detected in the 2014 class.

Our “zero tolerance” policy was actively complemented by intensive education on research integrity and scientific writing. Also, policies were reinforced through discussion sessions, written statements describing the policy in all course syllabi, and a modified honor code in the form of a signed agreement to maintain research and academic integrity and report any observed cases. Honor codes constitute a simple, low-cost strategy that has been shown to prevent academic misconduct ( McCabe et al. 2001 ). However, our experience collaborating with several Latin American educational institutions, has led us to believe that honor codes are not frequently used in Latin America. Furthermore, we feel that although many Latin American educational institutions may have codes of conduct, these are probably not discussed with students, faculty and researchers. We feel that signing a short but very clear and explicit honor code may be a more effective alternative for preventing misconduct by directly engaging students and all the academic and scientific community.

Education in the RCR is a critical pillar for maintaining research integrity and preventing plagiarism ( Steneck and Bulger 2007 ; Kalichman 2007 ), and comprised the medullar aspect of our policy. Seminars on plagiarism and scientific writing were upgraded into an obligatory course on research integrity. Short online research integrity courses were used as additional activities, including both the required CITI basic RCR course for biomedical researchers ( Braunschweiger and Goodman 2007 ; Litewka et al. 2008 ), as well as the optional, free, online RCR course recently created by UPCH and NAMRU-6 ( http://www.cri.andeanquipu.org/index.php/es/ ). The definition, forms, implications and case studies of plagiarism were thoroughly discussed, and practical advice was given on preventing plagiarism ( Roig 2009 ; Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ). Frequent maladaptive forms of writing, such as “patchwriting”, in which original and borrowed text are intermixed ( Cameron et al. 2012 ), and “copy/paste” were thoroughly discussed, emphasizing their intimate relation to plagiarism. Students were advised to express ideas taken from external sources in their own words, always linking each idea to its original source, and never to copy and paste. Other educative interventions implemented included: (i) breaking down extensive written assignments into multiple, smaller assignments, to allow the incremental development of writing skills ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); (ii) provision of templates, so that students have a clear idea of what is expected for each assignment ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); (iii) review of progress in an increased number of writing workshops, to provide detailed and timely guidance, allow early detection and correction of maladaptive writing strategies ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); and, (iv) requirement of more student-advisor meetings, in order to increase the oversight of the students’ work, and promote mentoring, an important strategy for maintaining research integrity ( Anderson et al. 2007 ).

As a complement to educative interventions, we now screen academic products for plagiarism ( Barret et al. 2003 ; McKeever 2006 ) using widely-available search engines (e.g. Google ® ) ( McKeever 2006 ). Searching actively for plagiarism allowed close monitoring the policy’s efficacy, and early identification and guidance of students with inadequate referencing skills ( Barret et al. 2003 ; McKeever 2006 ). This measure closely parallels the routine screening of submissions that has been increasingly implemented by scientific journals ( Butler 2010 ). In Peru, NAMRU-6 requires that the final version of all articles reporting research conducted at the institution is checked for plagiarism before being submitted using iThenticate ® (Andres G. Lescano personal communication, April 2015). In our program, plagiarism is evaluated on a case-by-case basis, after investigation and discussion among all coordinators and the faculty involved in the case. Penalties were also defined individually, following the program and university’s policy, and were complemented with rehabilitative measures ( Whitley and Keith-Spiegel 2001 ), such as intensive counseling by an experienced faculty and remedial educative activities.

The case study approach we adopted does not allow a formal evaluation of the efficacy of our program’s policy against plagiarism and cheating, but it may expand the extant literature in Latin America. Our experience delivered several important learning points. First, plagiarism seems to be widespread, likely involving all stages of the educative system. Second, it is possible to implement a “zero tolerance” plagiarism prevention policy with a strong educational component in postgraduate research programs. We implemented a promising, feasible, low-cost policy tailored for postgraduate research students in Latin America, with the aim to offer educators and researchers practical alternatives to prevent and address plagiarism that they could continue to evaluate in their practice. Third, key features associated with plagiarism in Latin America that should be considered when discussing plagiarism in the classroom include the unawareness of plagiarism and its implications, the pervasiveness of poorly-developed writing skills, and the extensive use of “patchwriting” and “copy/paste”. Fourth, students with low academic performance may be at higher risk of committing plagiarism, and implement personalized tutoring and close surveillance to prevent them from plagiarizing. Given that our experience pertains a taught Masters program that receives students from several Latin American countries, we believe that our findings are applicable to postgraduate research students in Latin America. However, we emphasize that our findings may also be useful for educators and postgraduate research programs in other resource-limited, non-English speaking settings after critical assessment and a context-sensitive adaptation. Finally, it is urgent that educative institutions at all levels recognize the frequent occurrence of academic and research misconduct and integrity as an active, institutional duty. Furthermore, as the methods for engaging in dishonesty have expanded in the Internet era, preventive approaches coupled with zero tolerance for plagiarism and cheating will have a major role for controlling academic and research misconduct, even in low resource settings ( Grieger 2007 ).

Plagiarism and cheating appear to be a frequent problem in research training programs in resource-limited settings, such as Peru. These instances of misconduct should be addressed at institutional and programmatic levels through policies that prioritize preventive strategies, instead of purely punitive actions. Educational activities and mentoring should be complemented with strict, active detection and zero tolerance to misconduct.

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the training Grant 2D43 TW007393-06 awarded to AGL by the Fogarty International Center of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright Statement One author of this manuscript is an employee of the U.S. Government. This work was prepared as part of his duties. Title 17 U.S.C. § 105 provides that ‘Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.’ Title 17 U.S.C. § 101 defines a U.S. Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the U.S. Government as part of that person’s official duties. The Corresponding Author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, a worldwide license to the Publishers and its licensees in perpetuity, in all forms, formats and media (whether known now or created in the future), to (i) publish, reproduce, distribute, display and store the Contribution, (ii) translate the Contribution into other languages, create adaptations, reprints, include within collections and create summaries, extracts and/or, abstracts of the Contribution, (iii) create any other derivative work(s) based on the Contribution, (iv) to exploit all subsidiary rights in the Contribution, (v) the inclusion of electronic links from the Contribution to third party material wherever it may be located; and, (vi) license any third party to do any or all of the above.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: all authors had financial support from the NIH Fogarty International Center for the submitted work; all authors had paid teaching positions at Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Disclaimer The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, nor the U.S. Government.

• Alfaro-Tolosa P, Mayta-Tristan P, Rodriguez-Morales AJ. Publication misconduct and plagiarism retractions: A Latin American perspective. Current Medical Research and Opinion. 2013; 29 (2):1–2. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Allchin D. Values in science: An educational perspective. Science & Education. 1999; 8 :1–12. [ Google Scholar ]
• 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. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ana J, Koehlmoos T, Smith R, Yan LL. Research misconduct in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine. 2013; 10 (3):e1001315. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior? Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):853–860. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barret R, Malcolm J, Lyon C. Are we ready for large scale use of plagiarism detection tools?; 4th Annual LTSN-ICS Conference, 2003; 2003. [Accessed Jan 2012]. http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/Events/conf2003/Ruth%20Barrett.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Braunschweiger P, Goodman KW. The CITI program: An international online resource for education in human subjects protection and the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):861–864. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butler D. Journals step up plagiarism policing. Nature. 2010; 466 (7303):167. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cameron C, Zhao H, McHugh MK. Publication ethics and the emerging scientific workforce: Understanding “Plagiarism” in a global context. Academic Medicine. 2012; 87 (1):51–54. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Catanzaro M, Miranda G, Palmer L, Bajak A. South American science: Big players. Nature. 2014; 510 (7504):204–206. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, & Institute of Medicine. On being a scientist: A guide to responsible conduct in research. 3rd. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Davis MS. The role of culture in research misconduct. Accountability in Research. 2003; 10 (3):189–201. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fischer BA, Zigmond MJ. Educational approaches for discouraging plagiarism. Urologic Oncology. 2011; 29 (1):100–103. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Grieger MC. Ghostwriters and commerce of scientific papers on the internet: science at risk. Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira. 2007; 53 (3):247–251. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heitman E, Litewka S. International perspectives on plagiarism and considerations for teaching international trainees. Urologic Oncology. 2011; 29 (1):104–108. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heitman E, Olsen CH, Anestidou L, Bulger RE. New graduate students’ baseline knowledge of the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):838–845. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofstede G. Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in contex. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. 2011; 2 (1):26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huamani C, Dulanto-Pizzorni A, Rojas-Revoredo V. ‘Copy and paste’ in undergraduate research: Abusing Internet. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2008; 69 (2):117–119. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kalichman MW. Responding to challenges in educating for the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):870–875. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Krstic SB. Research integrity practices from the perspective of early-career researchers. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015; 21 (5):1181–1196. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Litewka S, Goodman K, Braunschweiger P. The ClTI program: An alternative for research ethics education in Latin America. Acta Bioethica. 2008; 14 (1):54–60. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lovett-Hopper G, Komarraju M, Weston R, Dollinger SJ. Is plagiarism a forerunner of other deviance? Imagined futures of academically dishonest students. Ethics and Behavior. 2007; 17 (3):323–336. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martin DE. Culture and unethical conduct: Understanding the impact of individualism and collectivism on actual plagiarism. Management Learning. 2012; 43 (3):261–273. [ Google Scholar ]
• Martinson BC, Anderson MS, de Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature. 2005; 435 :737–738. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McCabe DL. Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity. 2005; 1 (1):1–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• McCabe DL, Treviño LK, Butterfield KD. Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):219–222. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKeever L. Online plagiarism detection services-saviour or scourge? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 2006; 31 (2):155–165. [ Google Scholar ]
• Park C. In other (People’s) words: Plagiarism by university students—literature and lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 2003; 28 (5):471–488. [ Google Scholar ]
• Park C. Rebels without a clause: Towards an institutional framework for dealing with plagiarism by students. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2004; 28 (3):291–306. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pupovac V, Fanelli D. Scientists admitting to plagiarism: A meta-analysis of surveys. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015; 21 (5):1331–1352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rennie SC, Crosby JR. Are “tomorrow’s doctors” honest? Questionnaire study exploring medical students’s attitudes and reported behaviour on academic misconduct. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 2001; 322 :274–275. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodriguez E, Lolas F. The topic of research integrity in Latin America. Bioethikos. 2011; 5 (4):362–368. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Roig M. Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. [Accessed 12 Sept, 2011]; 2009 http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/plagiarism/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Rojas-Revoredo V, Huamani C, Mayta-Tristan P. Plagiarism in undergraduate publications: Experiences and recommendations. Revista Medica de Chile. 2007; 135 :1087–1088. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan G, Bonanno H, Krass I, Scouller K, Smith L. Undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students’ perceptions of plagiarism and academic honesty. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2009; 73 (6):105. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saldana-Gastulo JJ, Quezada-Osoria CC, Pena-Oscuvilca A, Mayta-Tristan P. High frequency of plagiarism in medical thesis from a Peruvian public university. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica. 2010; 27 (1):63–67. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salter SB, Guffey DM. Truth, consequences and culture: A comparative examination of cheating and attitudes about cheating among U.S. and U.K. students. Journal of Business Ethics. 2001; 31 :37–50. [ Google Scholar ]
• SCImago Research Group. SCImago Institution Rankings. [Accessed 2015 Mar 19]; Ranking Iberoamericano SIR 2015. 2015 http://www.scimagoir.com/pdf/iber_new/SIR%20Iber%202015%20HE.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith R. What is research misconduct. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. 2000; 30 :4–8. [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH. Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2006; 12 :53–74. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steneck NH, Bulger RE. The history, purpose, and future of instruction in the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):830–834. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swazey J, Anderson M, Louis K. Ethical problems in academic research. American Scientist. 1993; 81 :542–553. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tantaleán Odar RM. ¡¿Ya podemos plagiar?! Crítica a las resoluciones No 191-2009 y 288-2009-CODACUN. Derecho y Cambio Social, Año XI. 2014;(36):23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Taradi SK, Taradi M, Knezevic T, Dogas Z. Students come to medical school prepared to cheat: A multi-campus investigation. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2010; 36 (1):666–670. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Titus SL, Wells JA, Rhoades LJ. Repairing research integrity. Nature. 2008; 453 :980–982. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Reglamento Disciplinario. 2009 http://www.upch.edu.pe/portal/images/stories/files/REGLAMENTO_DISCIPLINARIO.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Noorden R. The impact gap: South America by the numbers. Nature. 2014; 510 (7504):202–203. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vasconcelos S, Leta J, Costa L, Pinto A, Sorenson ME. Discussing plagiarism in Latin American science. EMBO Reports. 2009; 10 (7):677–682. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wadja-Johnston VA, Handal PJ, Brawer PA, Fabricatore AN. Academic dishonesty at the graduate level. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):287–305. [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitley BE, Jr, Keith-Spiegel P. Academic integrity as an institutional issue. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):325–342. [ Google Scholar ]

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

MLA Sample Paper

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

This resource contains a sample MLA paper that adheres to the 2016 updates. To download the MLA sample paper, click this link .

Albert Bandura Contributions to Human Behavior

This essay about Albert Bandura’s influential contributions to psychology, focusing on his groundbreaking research on observational learning and self-efficacy. Bandura’s work has reshaped our understanding of human behavior, highlighting the role of social influences and personal beliefs in shaping individual actions and achievements. His insights have not only advanced the field of psychology but also inspired practical interventions across various domains, promoting positive behavior change and fostering resilience. Bandura’s legacy continues to resonate, serving as a guiding light for scholars and practitioners striving to unlock the mysteries of human behavior and potential.

How it works

Within the realm of psychology, few figures have left as profound a legacy as Albert Bandura. His pioneering research has fundamentally altered our comprehension of human behavior, paving the way for transformative insights into the complexities of social learning and self-efficacy.

At the heart of Bandura’s work lies the concept of observational learning, illuminating the power of vicarious experiences in shaping individual behavior. Through his iconic experiments involving the Bobo doll, Bandura revealed the potency of social modeling in influencing the actions and attitudes of individuals, challenging conventional notions of behaviorism and fostering a deeper understanding of human agency.

Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy further expands upon this foundation, emphasizing the critical role of belief in one’s own capabilities in driving motivation and performance. His research has underscored how individuals with a strong sense of self-efficacy are more likely to persevere in the face of adversity, pursue ambitious goals, and ultimately achieve success in their endeavors.

Beyond theoretical frameworks, Bandura’s work has spurred practical applications across diverse domains, from education to healthcare and beyond. His insights have informed the development of interventions aimed at empowering individuals to cultivate resilience, adopt healthier behaviors, and realize their full potential.

Moreover, Bandura’s contributions extend beyond the boundaries of psychology, influencing fields as varied as organizational management and public policy. His research has provided a lens through which to understand and address pressing social issues, offering pathways for promoting positive change and fostering a more equitable and empowered society.

In essence, Albert Bandura’s impact on the study of human behavior is immeasurable, his legacy enduring as a beacon of innovation and insight. Through his pioneering research and enduring contributions, Bandura has not only expanded the frontiers of psychological knowledge but has also inspired generations to harness the power of social learning and self-belief in pursuit of a brighter future.

Cite this page

Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior. (2024, Apr 22). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/

"Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior." PapersOwl.com , 22 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/ [Accessed: 22 Apr. 2024]

"Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior." PapersOwl.com, Apr 22, 2024. Accessed April 22, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/

"Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior," PapersOwl.com , 22-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/. [Accessed: 22-Apr-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Albert Bandura Contributions To Human Behavior . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/albert-bandura-contributions-to-human-behavior/ [Accessed: 22-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Newsletters

IE 11 Not Supported

Study: ai used in 11% of student papers since april 2023, a study by anti-plagiarism platform developer turnitin, which reviewed over 200 million student papers worldwide since april 2023, found that over 22 million of them used ai to generate at least 20 percent of the writing..

BY THE NUMBERS