48
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patterns of Text Reuse in a Scientific Corpus

      Preprint
      ,

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          We consider the incidence of text "reuse" by researchers, via a systematic pairwise comparison of the text content of all articles deposited to arXiv.org from 1991--2012. We measure the global frequencies of three classes of text reuse, and measure how chronic text reuse is distributed among authors in the dataset. We infer a baseline for accepted practice, perhaps surprisingly permissive compared with other societal contexts, and a clearly delineated set of aberrant authors. We find a negative correlation between the amount of reused text in an article and its influence, as measured by subsequent citations. Finally, we consider the distribution of countries of origin of articles containing large amounts of reused text.

          Related collections

          Most cited references8

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A tale of two citations.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            ArXiv at 20.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Publication misconduct and plagiarism retractions: a systematic, retrospective study.

              To investigate whether plagiarism is more prevalent in publications retracted from the medical literature when first authors are affiliated with lower-income countries versus higher-income countries. Secondary objectives included investigating other factors associated with plagiarism (e.g., national language of the first author's country affiliation, publication type, journal ranking). Systematic, controlled, retrospective, bibliometric study. Retracted publications dataset in MEDLINE (search filters: English, human, January 1966-February 2008). Retracted misconduct publications were classified according to the first author's country affiliation, country income level, and country national language, publication type, and ranking of the publishing journal. Standardised definitions and data collection tools were used; data were analysed (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence limits [CL], chi-squared tests) by an independent academic statistician. Of the 213 retracted misconduct publications, 41.8% (89/213) were retracted for plagiarism, 52.1% (111/213) for falsification/fabrication, 2.3% (5/213) for author disputes, 2.3% (5/213) for ethical issues, and 1.4% (3/213) for unknown reasons. The OR (95% CL) of plagiarism retractions (other misconduct retractions as reference) were higher (P  1 retraction) with publications retracted for plagiarism (11.5%, 9/78) than other types of misconduct (28.9%, 24/83). This is the first study to demonstrate that publications retracted for plagiarism are significantly associated with first authors affiliated with lower-income countries. These findings have implications for developing appropriate evidence-based strategies and allocation of resources to help mitigate plagiarism misconduct.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                08 December 2014
                Article
                10.1073/pnas.1415135111
                1412.2716
                a6dad2ad-7759-4855-9a4f-73a6ec35a68e

                http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

                History
                Custom metadata
                6 pages, plus 10 pages of supplementary material. To appear in PNAS (online 8 Dec 2014)
                cs.DL physics.soc-ph

                Comments

                Comment on this article