ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesPublication ethics

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Plagiarism: a misplaced emphasis (Papers: Brian Martin 1994)0

Posted by Admin in on January 14, 2016
 

Abstract: Plagiarism is conventionally seen as a serious breach of scholarly ethics, being a theft of credit for ideas in a competitive intellectual marketplace. This emphasis overlooks the vast amount of institutionalized plagiarism, including ghostwriting and attribution of authorship to bureaucratic elites. There is a case for reducing the stigma for competitive plagiarism while exposing and challenging the institutionalized varieties.

Brian Martin. Plagiarism: a misplaced emphasis. Journal of Information Ethics, Vol. 3, No. 2, Fall 1994, pp. 36-47. On the over-emphasis on competitive plagiarism and the neglect of institutionalised plagiarism.

Plagiarism by university students: the problem and some proposals – Tertangala (Brian Martin 1992).0

Posted by Admin in on January 14, 2016
 

“Plagiarism — the use of other people’s words or ideas without giving proper credit — is only one part of the general problem of cheating. Anecdotal evidence as well as a few studies suggest that student cheating is much more widespread than usually recognised. (Although exams are thought to prevent cheating more than essays, actually the rate of cheating on exams may be higher than for any other assessment mode.)

Most cheating is undetected. For every student caught plagiarising, it is almost certain that many more plagiarisers escape detection.

Elimination of plagiarism by detection and penalties is labour-intensive and ultimately impossible. One article recommends that, to detect plagiarism, each essay be read four times. But this only picks up copying from published sources; copying from other essays, or false authorship of essays, is seldom detectable or provable.”

Brian Martin. Plagiarism by university students: the problem and some proposals. Tertangala, 20 July – 3 August 1992, p. 20.

Agent Orange: the new controversy (Brian Martin 1986)0

Posted by Admin in on January 13, 2016
 

“A year after the final report of the Agent Orange Royal Commission, the federal government has responded to the concern of Vietnam veterans by reopening the issue that the commission considered closed. Conflicting scientific evidence and interpretation are back in the melting pot. But in this case there is an added factor – the conduct of the commission itself.

When the report of a royal commission contains hundreds of pages copied without acknowledgement straight from the submission of one of the interested parties, what are the implications? This problem will quickly become pressing in any reevaluation of the Report of the Royal Commission on the Use and Effects of Chemical Agents on Australian Personnel in Vietnam.

Claims by Vietnam veterans that some of their health problems have been caused by exposure to the multitude of chemical agents used in the war are politically explosive. A judgement in favour of the veterans would provide support to the Vietnamese government in pursuing claims against the United States government for the effects of chemical warfare. The chemical industry has most to lose from a decision in favour of the veterans. For example, the ingredients of Agent Orange itself, 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T with some admixture of TCDD or ‘dioxin’, have long been used as herbicides in agriculture and elsewhere. A decision against the chemicals would be a body blow to the chemical industry both financially and ideologically.”

Brian Martin. Agent Orange: the new controversy. Australian Society, Vol. 5, No. 11, November 1986, pp. 25-26. On the Agent Orange Royal Commission’s plagiarism of Monsanto’s submission.

Plagiarism and responsibility (Papers: Brian Martin 1984)0

Posted by Admin in on January 13, 2016
 

“Plagiarism is more prevalent in academia than normally acknowledged. Because it is a “taboo” topic, administrations are ill-equipped to investigate allegations of plagiarism. Two Australian examples are used to illustrate the need for more openness about and better procedures for dealing with this academic problem.

Plagiarism is not uncommon in academia, but its occurrence has received scant attention in public forums and hardly any in the scholarly literature. In this article I first describe the nature and extent of plagiarism in academia, and then use two Australian examples to illustrate the potential problems this poses for administrators.

The Nature of Plagiarism

Plagiarism has been defined as “the taking and using as one’s own of the thoughts, writings, or inventions of another”.[1] There are many varieties and degrees of plagiarism. I will deal here with plagiarism of written work in academia and science, although the problem is not limited to these areas.[2]”

Brian Martin. Plagiarism and responsibility. Journal of Tertiary Educational Administration, Vol. 6, No. 2, October 1984, pp. 183-190.

0