Editorial challenges in a small scientific community: Study of Croatian editors

Vrana, Radovan

doi:10.1002/leap.1188

Cited by 10 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, we hypothesize that non-Western academics might have alternative views on academic misconduct. Previous studies of the academic periphery have revealed that the level of plagiarism in academia is higher when compared with Western countries (Davis, 2003;Hodges et al, 2017;Lewellyn et al, 2017;Thomas and Bruin, 2015;Vrana, 2018). These findings confirm Clark's (1986) statement that an attachment to a global standard without borders is less evident in non-European and non-North American contexts.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Ethical ambiguity in the academic periphery: Global versus local science in explaining plagiarism

Guba¹,

Tsivinskaya²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past decade has seen extensive research carried out on the systematic causes of academic misconduct. Simultaneously, less attention has been paid to the variation in academic pathologies between research fields, as most empirical studies focus on one particular discipline. We propose that academic discipline is one of several systematic factors that might contribute to academic misbehavior. Drawing on a neo-institutional approach, we argue that on the academic periphery, the norm of textual originality has not drawn equal support across different research fields depending on its level of internationalization. Using plagiarism detection software, we analyzed 2,405 doctoral dissertations randomly selected from all dissertations defended in Russia between 2006 and 2016. We measured the globalization of each academic discipline by calculating the share of publications indexed in the global citation database in relation to overall output. Our results showed that, with an average share of detected borrowings of over 19%, the incidence of plagiarism on the academic periphery is remarkably higher than in Western countries. Overall, disciplines closely follow the pattern of higher globalization associated with a lower percentage of borrowed text. We also found that unauthorized borrowing is less prevalent at research-oriented institutions supporting global ethical standards. Our findings suggest that it might be misleading to measure the prevalence of academic misconduct on the academic periphery without paying attention to variations at the disciplinary level.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Ethical ambiguity in the academic periphery: Global versus local science in explaining plagiarism

Guba¹,

Tsivinskaya²

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(США), В. Бейкер (США), С. Хейнс (США) у своїх наукових дослідженнях розглядають можливості і вплив рецензентів на удосконалення процесу експертизи [5]. Внесок редакторів наукових видань у просуванні та вдосконаленні своїх журналів, проблеми, які вони повинні вирішувати представлені у дослідженнях М. Марушич, А. Марушич (Хорватія) [6], Р. Врано (Хорватія) [7]. Г. МакДоуел (США), Дж.…”

Section: The Electronic Scientific Professional Edition "Information unclassified

Effective Peer Review of Publications as a Guarantee for Scientific Editions Quality

Пінчук¹,

Malytska²

2020

ТіПУСС

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When attempting to estimate the scale of plagiarism, most research looks at post‐publication problems, but these do not consider plagiarism in article submissions, which may not make it through to publication. In his 2017 survey, Vrana () identified plagiarized submissions as an item of major concern amongst Croatian editors. The small‐scale survey demonstrated that it was the second largest problem that the editors experienced.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How prevalent are plagiarized submissions? Global survey of editors

Smart

Gaston

2019

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most analyses of plagiarism focus on published content and do not report on the prevalence of plagiarism in submitted articles. Fears over large‐scale plagiarism, particularly in articles submitted by authors for whom English is a second language, have only been investigated in small publishing communities or using duplication‐checking analysis, which does not separate legitimate from unacceptable duplication. This research surveyed journal editors from around the world to ascertain recent (past year) experiences of plagiarized and/or duplicated submissions. We then compared their experiences to their assumptions about global levels of plagiarism. The survey received 372 responses, including 119 from Asian editors, 112 from European editors, and 57 from editors in North America. The respondents estimated that c.15% of all submissions contained plagiarized or duplicated content, although their own experiences were in the range of 2–5% of submissions. Of the respondents, 42% reported no incidence of plagiarized or duplicated submissions in the past year. Asian editors experienced the highest levels of plagiarized/duplicated content, although most of the problem articles were resolved, indicating that most of the identified duplication constituted relatively minor problems, rather than fraudulent plagiarism.

show abstract

Editorial challenges in a small scientific community: Study of Croatian editors

Cited by 10 publications

References 23 publications

Ethical ambiguity in the academic periphery: Global versus local science in explaining plagiarism

Ethical ambiguity in the academic periphery: Global versus local science in explaining plagiarism

Effective Peer Review of Publications as a Guarantee for Scientific Editions Quality

How prevalent are plagiarized submissions? Global survey of editors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About