[AISWorld] Plagiarism and "Self-Plagiarism"

[Hossein S. Zadeh]

Hi there,
All of these are nice, and I am sure each one of us has a few examples to contribute. But from an administration point of view, how do we actually detect/enforce/defend the "substantially different" part?  

It seems we are discussing three related, but distinct, issues:

*) consensus on what is or is not ethical behaviour when it comes to publishing one's academic work
*) articulating details of the above, and setting up a set of guidelines/policies around those
*) enforcement of the said guidelines/policies

This all need to be clearly articulated in any forthcoming policy. In parallel, we will have to think of:

*) setting up clear appeal process, as well as the inevitable arbitration channels

Regards,
Hossein

--
Dr Hossein S. Zadeh
  BSc, MEng, PhD
  GCTLT, MACS CP, MAIS
Director - DIBA Group Pty Ltd
7 May Street, Doncaster East, Australia 3109
Ph: +61 413 024 423





On 14/12/2011, at 11:32 AM, Lars Taxén wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> Just a small addition to Pekkola's post.
> 
> A similar situation is when you have elaborated a theory that can be
> applied to various problems in different contexts. A certain
> contribution would then consist of a common "module" describing the
> theory, and a specific contribution for each context in which the
> theory is applied. Each paper is a significant contribution, although
> it contains a part that is the same in several contributions.
> 
> It would be nice if you could  "reuse" the theory-module by just
> copying the text and write only the specific part. However, this is
> not possible today unless you have the consent of the publisher of a
> previous contribution. To me, it does not make much sense to make
> cosmetic changes in the theory-module just to escape the copy-right
> rules.  A "modular" kind of publishing system would be much
> appreciated, I believe.
> 
> Lars
> 
> 
> 2011/12/14 Pekkola Samuli <samuli.pekkola at tut.fi>:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> just a little comment.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> The evaluation of an article, whether it is (self-)plagiarism (agree the
>> problems with the term), should be based on the contributions of the paper.
>> As long as the contributions in two papers are _significantly_ different,
>> there should be no issue of recycling chapters/paragraphs or fear being
>> accused for plagiarism. This means that conf/workshop papers can be updated
>> to journals providing they make significant additions to our knowledge base.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Particularly this is an issue when constructing the systems/models/etc. For
>> example, long time ago I designed, build and evaluated systems. Publishing
>> the results of each of those phases meant that I had to recycle the ideas
>> and even text from the earlier papers. Let say the first paper(s) was about
>> design principles and features of the to-be system. The second (set of)
>> papers were more technical. To understand them and the design rationale
>> behind, I had to describe the design principles from the first (set of)
>> papers. And with the third set of papers, i.e. evaluating the technical
>> construct, I had to describe both the design principles (i.e. the criteria
>> for evaluation) and technical construct (that provided a basis to argue why
>> certain criteria were confirmed/disconfirmed). In other words, a large
>> portion of content of the third set of papers were adapted from the earlier
>> two sets. However, each and every paper still makes different contribution.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From this perspective, to make strict rules that x% of the text needs to be
>> new is bit strange, as a lot of content might be the same (even though
>> rewritten). My two cents is to focus on contributions and their uniqueness
>> and significance.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> samuli
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> Samuli Pekkola
>> 
>> Professor, Adjunct Professor, PhD
>> Head of Department
>> 
>> Department of Business Information Management and Logistics
>> Tampere University of Technology
>> PO Box 541, 33101 Tampere, Finland
>> t: +358 (0)40 586 0791
>> e: samuli.pekkola at tut.fi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Lars Taxén, Associate Professor
> Department of Science and Technology
> Campus Norrköping, Linköpings Universitet
> Rundan 91
> SE 14645 Tullinge, Sweden
> mobile: +46 (0)73 0977864
> lars.taxen at telia.com
> www.neana.se
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AISWorld mailing list
> AISWorld at lists.aisnet.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aisnet.org/pipermail/aisworld_lists.aisnet.org/attachments/20111214/661da710/attachment.html>