4 ms·

I repeat myself quite often. Sometimes I even realize I’ve said the same thing before and copy what I wrote previously instead of typing it out again. Am I a pl

I repeat myself quite often. Sometimes I even realize I’ve said the same thing before and copy what I wrote previously instead of typing it out again. Am I a plagiarist? If I plagiarize myself, who is the victim?

Ansil849 5y ago
Self-plagiarism is a pretty boiler-plate clause in most mature codes of conduct (e.g. when submitting a paper for publication). It doesn't mean "I use the same turn of phrase every once in a while". It means "I reproduced substantial portions of prior research or other text of my own and passed it off as new research." As for who the victim is, typically the direct victim would be the funder: if you received a grant to pursue novel research and it turns out you were just rehashing prior work, then you have stolen funding. Similarly, if you are under the employ of a university, then you have stolen funds by reproducing old research and passing it off as new...instead of actually producing new research. These are of course only the monetary victims, the broader victims are those robbed of scholarly advancement by having your job title filled by someone who recycles material versus advancing the field.
- marbletimes 5y ago
  It is a tricky subject. When I referred to a model I had published elsewhere, I was asked to write about the model again in the current paper, since readers may not be able to access or want to access the other paper. But more recently, I was asked to do the opposite, since the model I was writing about in the Methods section was the same I had published elsewhere. I see no reason to change terms and structure in scientific publications so as not to plagiarize myself.
  - Ansil849 5y ago
    > I see no reason to change terms and structure in scientific publications so as not to plagiarize myself. There generally is no reason to change terms and the like. The solution is simply to cite one's prior work when quoting from it - the lack of the latter (citing that a given text is one's prior work) is what constitutes self-plagiarism, not the mere reuse of terminology.
  - dagw 5y ago
    My wife wrote two papers covering different aspects of the same experiment, and copy and pasted the experiment setup description (a couple of paragraphs) from one paper to the other. The plagiarism detection software of the journal she tried to publish the second paper in flagged the paragraphs and they refused to publish until she 'fixed' it.

Ansil849 5y ago

Self-plagiarism is a pretty boiler-plate clause in most mature codes of conduct (e.g. when submitting a paper for publication). It doesn't mean "I use the same turn of phrase every once in a while". It means "I reproduced substantial portions of prior research or other text of my own and passed it off as new research." As for who the victim is, typically the direct victim would be the funder: if you received a grant to pursue novel research and it turns out you were just rehashing prior work, then you have stolen funding. Similarly, if you are under the employ of a university, then you have stolen funds by reproducing old research and passing it off as new...instead of actually producing new research. These are of course only the monetary victims, the broader victims are those robbed of scholarly advancement by having your job title filled by someone who recycles material versus advancing the field.

marbletimes 5y ago
It is a tricky subject. When I referred to a model I had published elsewhere, I was asked to write about the model again in the current paper, since readers may not be able to access or want to access the other paper. But more recently, I was asked to do the opposite, since the model I was writing about in the Methods section was the same I had published elsewhere. I see no reason to change terms and structure in scientific publications so as not to plagiarize myself.
- Ansil849 5y ago
  > I see no reason to change terms and structure in scientific publications so as not to plagiarize myself. There generally is no reason to change terms and the like. The solution is simply to cite one's prior work when quoting from it - the lack of the latter (citing that a given text is one's prior work) is what constitutes self-plagiarism, not the mere reuse of terminology.
- dagw 5y ago
  My wife wrote two papers covering different aspects of the same experiment, and copy and pasted the experiment setup description (a couple of paragraphs) from one paper to the other. The plagiarism detection software of the journal she tried to publish the second paper in flagged the paragraphs and they refused to publish until she 'fixed' it.