5 ms·

>plagiarism as many publications in academia outsource a large amount of work to others (PhD students, for example) Do you have a source for this claim? PhD st

by feet 4y ago

>plagiarism as many publications in academia outsource a large amount of work to others (PhD students, for example) Do you have a source for this claim? PhD students get credit for the work that they perform, their names are on the papers so I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that they aren't getting credit or that this is somehow plagiarism

jeroenhd 4y ago
They certainly do get credit, and working together is not even close to plagiarism. However, I've read plenty of papers where the "author" put front and center in news articles and the like was no more than the person managing and editorialising a group of PhD students which did the actual leg work. Everyone gets credited in some way but there is no way to know for sure that the author listed most prominently has personally read and verified all the sources. An overworked or overconfident PhD student could have plagiarised an article or log post, pretended it was their own work to hit the deadline and still get co-authorship on the publication, and convince the "author" that the magnificent work was all their own, "infecting" their coauthors without their knowledge. This is very easy if you have a good standing within your group and make no suggestion that you need to resort to plagiarism. Needing access to physical resources like rare books makes it even easier to hide your lies because validating such work takes a lot of effort. During several plagiarism cases that have hit the national news here researchers had coauthored papers with convincing liars, expanding upon earlier work or taking a made up data set and applying real, proper methodology to it. Often the coauthors had to find out through the papers that their publications were at risk of retraction when a liar had been found out. I don't believe researchers are on the habit of checking every single line of text their coauthor writes for matches online because not plagiarising is the norm.

by feet 4y ago

jeroenhd 4y ago

They certainly do get credit, and working together is not even close to plagiarism. However, I've read plenty of papers where the "author" put front and center in news articles and the like was no more than the person managing and editorialising a group of PhD students which did the actual leg work. Everyone gets credited in some way but there is no way to know for sure that the author listed most prominently has personally read and verified all the sources. An overworked or overconfident PhD student could have plagiarised an article or log post, pretended it was their own work to hit the deadline and still get co-authorship on the publication, and convince the "author" that the magnificent work was all their own, "infecting" their coauthors without their knowledge. This is very easy if you have a good standing within your group and make no suggestion that you need to resort to plagiarism. Needing access to physical resources like rare books makes it even easier to hide your lies because validating such work takes a lot of effort. During several plagiarism cases that have hit the national news here researchers had coauthored papers with convincing liars, expanding upon earlier work or taking a made up data set and applying real, proper methodology to it. Often the coauthors had to find out through the papers that their publications were at risk of retraction when a liar had been found out. I don't believe researchers are on the habit of checking every single line of text their coauthor writes for matches online because not plagiarising is the norm.