Perceptions of plagiarism by biomedical researchers: an online survey in Europe and China

Abstract

Background: Plagiarism is considered as serious research misconduct, together with data fabrication and falsification. However, little is known about biomedical researchers' views on plagiarism. Moreover, it has been arguedbased on limited empirical evidencethat perceptions of plagiarism depend on cultural and other determinants. The authors explored, by means of an online survey among 46 reputable universities in Europe and China, how plagiarism is perceived by biomedical researchers in both regions. Methods: We collected work e-mail addresses of biomedical researchers identified through the websites of 13 reputable universities in Europe and 33 reputable universities in China and invited them to participate in an online anonymous survey. Our questionnaire was designed to assess respondents' views about plagiarism by asking whether they considered specific practices as plagiarism. We analyzed if respondents in China and Europe responded differently, using logistic regression analysis with adjustments for demographic and other relevant factors. Results: The authors obtained valid responses from 204 researchers based in China (response rate 2.1%) and 826 researchers based in Europe (response rate 5.6%). Copying text from someone else's publication without crediting the source, using idea(s) from someone else's publication without crediting the source and republishing one's own work in another language without crediting the source were considered as plagiarism by 98, 67 and 64%, respectively. About one-third of the respondents reported to have been unsure whether they had been plagiarizing. Overall, the pattern of responses was similar among respondents based in Europe and China. Nevertheless, for some items significant differences did occur in disadvantage of Chinese respondents. Conclusions: Findings indicate that nearly all biomedical researchers understand (and disapprove of) the most obvious forms of plagiarism, but uncertainties and doubts were apparent for many aspects. And the minority of researchers who did not recognize some types of plagiarism as plagiarism was larger among China-based respondents than among Europe-based respondents. The authors conclude that biomedical researchers need clearer working definitions of plagiarism in order to deal with grey zones.

Plagiarism in Non-Anglophone Countries: a Cross-sectional Survey of Researchers and Journal Editors

“… 17 18 There are only a few surveys that explore perceptions of plagiarism among scholars. 5 12 Notably, a cross-sectional survey of biomedical researchers in Europe and China was consistent with our finding of fair understanding about major forms of plagiarism, but uncertainties around the permissible extent of text copying. 12 Furthermore, lack of time for writing was reported to be another major factors leading to plagiarism in some instances.…”

“… 4 These are conventional reasons for plagiarism, however recently there is emerging evidence of language, cultural, and social barriers being a major roadway to plagiarism. 12 Since most instances of plagiarism may be unintentional, topical education may play a decisive role in curbing the issue and avoiding unnecessary post-publication discussions of poor writing and unethical behaviour by some researchers and authors. 16 Along with poor understanding of publication ethics, limited access to proprietary tools and platforms for detecting plagiarism may be another major impediment to credible publishing, particularly in non-Anglophone countries.…”

“… 11 An improved awareness of intentional and unintentional forms of plagiarism might place researchers and journal editors in the right shoes for tackle this timeless violation. 12 With the above mentioned in mind, we arranged this online survey to better understand perceptions of plagiarism in scholarly publishing among researchers and journals editors, particularly from non-Anglophone countries.…”

Plagiarism Software is a Creator or Destroyer for Effective Writing

“…yi 17 et al (2020) conducted research involving biomedical researchers. The sample study covered Europe and China.…”

Plagiarism detection and prevention: a primer for researchers

“…The awareness of various forms of plagiarism is growing due to the international research cooperation and quality publishing that involve academics with various language and cultural traditions. However, the issue Reumatologia 2021; 59/3 of plagiarism in the globalized world of science is complicated due to variably perceived definitions of the unethical conduct, recycling of one's own published materials, and unacceptable duplication of identical scientific information in different languages [7].…”