Recycling Is Not Always Good: The Dangers of Self-Plagiarism

ACS Nano (Impact Factor: 12.03). 01/2012; 6(1):1-4. DOI: 10.1021/nn3000912
Source: PubMed
  • European Journal of Clinical Investigation 01/2012; 42(10). DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2362.2012.02665.x · 2.83 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Plagiarism is one of the most important current debates among scientific stakeholders. A separate but related issue is the use of authors’ own ideas in different papers (i.e., self-plagiarism). Opinions on this issue are mixed, and there is a lack of consensus. Our goal was to gain deeper insight into plagiarism and self-plagiarism through a citation analysis of documents involved in these situations. The De´ja` vu database, which comprises around 80,000 duplicate records, was used to select 247 pairs of documents that had been examined by curators on a full text basis following a stringent protocol. We then used the Scopus database to perform a citation analysis of the selected documents. For each document pair, we used specific bibliometric indicators, such as the number of authors, full text similarity, journal impact factor, the Eigenfactor, and article influence. Our results confirm that cases of plagiarism are published in journals with lower visibility and thus tend to receive fewer citations. Moreover, full text similarity was significantly higher in cases of plagiarism than in cases of self-plagiarism. Among pairs of documents with shared authors, duplicates not citing the original document showed higher full text similarity than those citing the original document, and also showed greater overlap in the references cited in the two documents.
    Scientometrics 10/2014; 101(1). DOI:10.1007/s11192-014-1387-3 · 2.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this paper I identify some of the more common, problematic writing practices (e.g., plagiarism, selective reporting of literature, and/or results, 'spin') found in traditional journal articles, along with associated variables, and suggest ways to correct them. The primary aim of the discussion is to emphasize the cultivation of transparency, excellence in scholarship, and a 'best practices' approach to disseminating the results of our research.
    Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education 12/2014; 15(2):103-107. DOI:10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.832


Available from