Difference between revisions of "Resource:45c88d4b-9956-4b4f-9bfc-7095b6340195"
From The Embassy of Good Science
(Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Cases |Title=Seven Ways to Plagiarize: Handling Real Allegations of Research Misconduct; Case #4: The Background Section |Is About=This is the factua...") |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
|Has Link=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948-002-0005-6 | |Has Link=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11948-002-0005-6 | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0 | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Plagiarism | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Plagiarism | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 15:54, 26 February 2021
ResourcesCases
Seven Ways to Plagiarize: Handling Real Allegations of Research Misconduct; Case #4: The Background Section
What is this about?
This is the factual scenario of a grant applicant who copied the background section of another professor’s published work without the appropriate referencing and credits.
Why is this important?
Another factual anonymised case added to this illuminating collection of plagiarism types which was inspired by cases that an academic member of University encountered in his role as a research integrity officer.
This particular case highlights the fact that writing of a background section also constitutes intellectual effort (reviewing of available literature and synthesis towards an argument) and should therefore acknowledged and referenced appropriately.
It also provides another example of the possible outcomes of investigation of plagiarism allegations.
