Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

A Model Text Recycling Policy for Publishers (Policy: Cary Moskovitz, et al | April 2022)

Posted by Dr Gary Allen in Research Integrity on June 9, 2022
Keywords: Breaches, Institutional responsibilities, Journal, Research Misconduct, Research results

The Linked Original Item was Posted On April, 29 2022

A spiral notepad with the typed word Plagiarism written across the page.

Because science advances incrementally, scientists often need to repeat material included in their prior work when composing new texts. Such “text recycling” is a common but complex writing practice, so authors and editors need clear and consistent guidance about what constitutes appropriate practice. Unfortunately, publishers’ policies on text recycling to date have been incomplete, unclear, and sometimes internally inconsistent. Building on 4 years of research on text recycling in scientific writing, the Text Recycling Research Project has developed a model text recycling policy that should be widely applicable for research publications in scientific fields. This article lays out the challenges text recycling poses for editors and authors, describes key factors that were addressed in developing the policy, and explains the policy’s main features.

Even though this excellent policy is a very useful reference for publishers it will be helpful for researchers, research office staff and RIAs.  Also see https://textrecycling.org/. We have included links to six related items.  The point here is that some text recycling is permissible, but it matters where it is in a research output and how much there is.

Introduction

While scientists’ new publications are generally expected to make substantive contributions distinct from their earlier papers, the close relationship among papers often requires authors to repeat some content. Such recycled material typically consists of methodological details but may also include background material such as definitions or exposition that describes prior research.

In many fields of science, “text recycling” (sometimes inaccurately called “self-plagiarism”) is not an aberration but a common writing practice.1 Deciding whether any instance of text recycling is ethical, legal, and appropriate—and possibly even desirable—depends on factors such as the amount and nature of the recycled material as well as copyright laws and any limitations on reuse that are part of an author–publisher agreement.2 Thus, there is a need for clear and consistent guidelines on text recycling.

A Model Text Recycling Policy for Publishers - Science Editor
Because science advances incrementally, scientists often need to repeat material included in their prior work when composing new texts. Such “text recycling” is a common but complex writing practice, so authors and editors need clear and consistent guidance about what constitutes appropriate practic…

Related Reading

(Rwanda) Assessing knowledge of and attitudes towards plagiarism and ability to recognize plagiaristic writing among university students in Rwandam (Papers: Olivia Clarke, et al | April 2022)

(Russia) Research self-plagiarism rife in Russia – Times Higher Education (Jack Grove | February 2022)

The role of collegiality in academic review, promotion, and tenure (Preprint papers: Diane Dawson | January 2022)

Text Recycling in Chemistry Research: The Need for Clear and Consistent Guidelines (Book chapter: Cary Moskovitz | November 2021)

Recycling your thesis text – is it self plagiarism? – Patter (Pat Thomson | September 2021)

When is ‘self-plagiarism’ OK? New guidelines offer researchers rules for recycling text – Science (Cathleen O’Grady | June 2021)

Text Recycling Research Project

Text Recycling Research Project: update March 2021 – COPE (March 2021)

Standardizing terminology for text recycling in research writing (Papers: Cary Moskovitz | February 2021)

Guest article: Self-plagiarism in philosophy – COPE (M. V. Dougherty | July 2020)

(India) ‘Self-Plagiarism, Text Recycling Not Acceptable’: UGC – NDTV (Anisha Kumari | April 2020)

Text recycling: acceptable or misconduct? (Papers: Stephanie Harriman and Jigisha Patel | 2014)

What types of researchers are most likely to recycle text? The answers might surprise you – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook | October 2017)

How much text recycling is okay? – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook | July 2017)

Related Links

  • About the contributors
  • About the keywords
  • Suggest a resource
  • Report problem/broken link
  • Request a Take Down

Compiled here are links, downloads and other resources relating to research integrity and human research ethics. more…

Resources Menu

Four hands solving a jigsaw against the sun blazing out of a cloudy sky

Research Integrity

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books
  • Animal Ethics

Human Research Ethics

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in