The author recounts an experience in which one of his blog posts. He was saved when an Internet community rode to his rescue.
A study of matched content in student papers submitted to Turnitin reveals where students turn for sources but is unable to distinguish instances of plagiarism from valid scholarly use.
Allowing authors access to anti-plagiarism software makes pragmatic sense when you consider the demands scientific journals place on authors for perfect English, the pressures of group authorship, and the incrementalism of most papers. Perhaps it could even do more.
A critic of publishers and eminent economist is caught in a swirl of allegations about self-plagiarism.
The plagiarism-detection products in use in academia and scholarly publishing are also available for students and authors, who can pre-screen their papers to lower their chances of detection. In the middle, iParadigms takes money from both sides. Is this proper?
Humor about scientific misconduct may reflect a deeper, more serious side of academic culture gone wrong.
A massive study of student papers by Turnitin reveals that many are copying text from Wikipedia and other user-generated sites, but it’s not clear in distinguishing text-matches from plagiarism.
Essay mills are a thriving industry behind successful lazy and illiterate students.
Under threat of litigation, Emerald reverses claim of plagiarism to “communication error.” Offending author allowed to correct and republish work.
Lawsuits against British rock band, Coldplay, illustrate the blurred distinction between inspiration and theft.
What do authors say when they are caught duplicating text and figures from another paper? More than you’d imagine!