3 ms·
Absolutely. Every reviewer that I've met does plagiarism detection on their own. My advisor has even found instances where the author copy+pasted articles from
by gcr 13y ago
Absolutely.
Every reviewer that I've met does plagiarism detection on their own. My advisor has even found instances where the author copy+pasted articles from the likes of the Wikipedia article on the subject or 'about.com'; such papers get desk-rejected without review, and in some cases, the author is forbidden from submitting to IEEE conferences for the rest of their career. That's how important plagiarism is.
Just copy+pasting the abstract into Google is often enough to find it. At least for computer science conferences, the conference organizers run the papers through additional plagiarism screening tools before publishing, but it's mostly the reviewers' job.
- leephillips 13y ago"Every reviewer that I've met does plagiarism detection on their own." I don't think it's a bad idea, but it never occurred to me to do this. If you're familiar with the field in which you are reviewing papers, you'll know if something is not new, in which case it is rejected, quite aside from the possibility of the author having lifted some actual text.
- gcr 13y agoSure, but plagiarism is more than just trying to publish an old idea. One paper was of something novel, but in their background section, they just copied a paragraph or two from an older article. That's the no-no.
- leephillips 13y agoYou're right, my comment was not thoroughly considered. Maybe I should start doing some of this plagiarism detection. For some reason the idea depresses me, but you make a good case for it.