PLAGIARISM AND SELF-PLAGIARISM - (RE)KNOW TO PREVENT: INTEGRATIVE REVIEW
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
https://orcid.org/0009-0001-7681-4209
Maria Viviane Lisboa de Vasconcelos
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7861-7225
Larissa Evelyn Barbosa Floering Beltrão
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6613-5758
Celia Maria Silva Pedrosa
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9661-6066
Abstract
In the academic context, research is a fundamental pillar, complementing teaching and extension. Professors and students are driven by curiosity and the need to integrate teaching and research. However, circumstantial issues have led to inappropriate behaviors, such as plagiarism and self-plagiarism. To understand the perception and knowledge of authors who discuss plagiarism and self-plagiarism in scientific publications. An integrative review focused on scientific publications on plagiarism and self-plagiarism from 2018 to 2022, using bibliometric analysis and thematic content analysis. The research was conducted in the PubMed, BVS, and SciELO databases with the descriptors "plagiarism" AND "self-plagiarism." Results: A total of 52 articles were identified, 14 of which were selected, with a predominance of publications in English and proportional qualitative and quantitative approaches. These articles were published in ten different journals, representing a variety of nationalities. The analysis revealed three main themes: 1. (Lack of) knowledge about plagiarism and self-plagiarism – highlighting gaps in knowledge and challenges in academic training; 2. Reasons for plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and text recycling – addressing the motives and pressures leading to these practices; 3. Legal aspects of plagiarism and self-plagiarism – discussing legal and ethical considerations, the lack of proper supervision, and the implications for authors and institutions. The qualitative method allowed for a deeper exploration of the phenomenon of plagiarism and self-plagiarism, emphasizing the need for education on scientific ethics, efficient supervision, and clear legislation to address these practices.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
openAccess
Abbasi, P., Yoosefi-Lebni, J., Jalali, A., Ziapour, A., & Nouri, P. (2021). Causes of the plagiarism: a grounded theory study. Nursing Ethics, 28(2), 282-296. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32909912/.
Adler-Kassner, L., Anson, C. M., & Howard, R. M. (2008). Framing plagiarism. In Eisner, C., Vinicius, M. Originality, imitation and plagiarism: teaching writing in digital age. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.
Afonso, O. (2009). Direito autoral: conceitos essenciais. Barueri: Manole.
Anson, I. G., & Moskovitz, C. (2020). Text recycling in STEM: a text-analytic study of recently published research articles. Accountability in Research, 28(6), 349-371. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08989621.2020.1850284.
Assis, A. J. B., Holanda, C. A., & Amorim, R. F. B. (2019). Nova face de um velho problema: o autoplágio no cenário da produção científica. AGING Geriatr Gerontol, 13(2), 95-102. https://ggaging.com/details/533/pt-BR.
Bailey, J. (2020). 5 Ways COVID-19 is changing academic plagiarism. Plagiarism Today, 2020 out. 26. https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2020/10/26/5-ways-covid-19-is-changing-academic-plagiarism/.
Bardin, L. (2016). Análise de conteúdo. São Paulo: Edições 70.
Benedetti, A. P. (2016). Relações humanas e ética. Santa Maria: Universidade Industrial de Santa Maria; Rede e-Tec Brasil.
Brasil. (1998). Lei nº 9.610, de 19 de fevereiro de 1998. Altera, atualiza e consolida a legislação sobre direitos autorais e dá outras providências. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9610.htm.
Brito, A. L. P., & Carvalho, A. P. N. (2018). Autoplágio: uma violação ao direito à integridade intelectual? Rev. de Pesquisa e Educação Jurídica, 4(2), 35-50. https://indexlaw.org/index.php/rpej/article/view/4877.
Brito, S. L. C. (2021). Autoplágio na pesquisa científica: um ilícito? Interfaces Científicas – Direito, 8(3), 110-125. https://periodicos.set.edu.br/direito/article/view/10298.
Childers, D., & Bruton, S. (2016). “Should it be considered plagiarism?” student perceptions of complex citation issues. J Acad Ethics, 14, 1-17. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10805-015-9250-6.
Chinellato, S. J. A. (2015). Violações de direito autoral: plágio, ‘autoplágio’ e contrafação. In Costa Netto, J. C. (coord). Direito autoral atual. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.
Clarke, O., Chan, W. I. D., Bukuru, S., Logan, J., & Wong, R. (2022). Assessing knowledge of and attitudes towards plagiarism and ability to recognize plagiaristic writing among university students in Rwanda. Higher Education, 85(2), 247-63. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35431322/.
Committee on Publication Ethics. (2019). Retraction Guidelines. https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines.
Costa Netto, J. C. (1998). Direito autoral no Brasil. São Paulo: FTD.
Diniz, D., & Munhoz, A. T. M. (2011). Cópia e pastiche: plágio na comunicação científica. Argumentum, 3(1), 11-28. https://periodicos.ufes.br/argumentum/article/download/1430/1161/2437.
Fanelli, D. (2010). Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS ONE, 5(4), e10271. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0010271.
Fatima, A., Sunguh, K. K, Abbas, A., Mannan, A., & Hosseini, S. (2019). Impact of pressure, self-efficacy, and self-competency on students’ plagiarism in higher education. Accountability in Research, 27(1), 32-48. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31778079/.
Feenstra, R. A., López-Cózar, E. D., & Pallarés-Domínguez, D. (2021). Research misconduct in the fields of Ethics and Philosophy: researchers’ perceptions in Spain. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(1). https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33492516/.
Flynn, S., Schirru, L., Palmedo, M., & Izquierdo, A. (2022). Research Exceptions in Comparative Copyright. PIJIP/TLS Research Paper Series, 75, 1-38.
Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo. (2022). Perfil da retratação de artigos de autores brasileiros. Pesquisa Fapesp, 314. https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/perfil-da-retratacao-de-artigos-de-autores-brasileiros/.
Furlanetto, M. M., Rauen, F. J., & Siebert, S. (2018). Plágio e autoplágio: desencontros autorais. Linguagem em (Dis)curso, 18(1), 11-19. https://www.scielo.br/j/ld/a/B4bbw7ZyVjh8XnGHQJrKgzG/?format=pdf.
Garcia, R. (2021). O papel da intenção na caracterização do plágio no direito autoral brasileiro. Civilistica.com, 1, 1-21. https://civilistica.emnuvens.com.br/redc/article/download/552/524.
Gu, Q., & Brooks, J. (2008). Beyond the accusation of plagiarism. System, 36, 337-352. https://www.academia.edu/51652667/Beyond_the_accusation_of_plagiarism.
Hall, S., Moskovitz, C., & Pemberton, M. A. (2018). Attitudes toward text recycling in academic writing across disciplines. Accountability in Research, 25(3), 142-169. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29394122/.
Honig, B., & Bedi, A. (2012). The fox in the hen house: a critical examination of plagiarism among members of the Academy of Management. Academy of Management, Learning and Education, 11(1), 101-123.
Horbach, S. P. J. M, & Halffman, W. (2019). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or “self-plagiarism”. Res Policy, 48(2), 492-502. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733317301543.
Iloh, G. U. P., Amadi, A. N., Chukwuonye, M. E., & Godswill-Uko, E. U. (2018). Plagiarism in a resourceconstrained context: a cross-sectional study of post-graduate medical college trainees and fellows in a tertiary health institution in South East Nigeria. Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications. https://openaccess.library.uitm.edu.my/Record/doaj-1f64198d449e4f78ae52cb93c747c121.
Ismail, K. H. (2018). Perceptions of plagiarism among medical and Nursing students in Erbil, Iraq. Sultan Qaboos University Med J., 18(2), 196-201. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30210850/.
Le Ha, P. (2006). Plagiarism and overseas students: stereotypes again? ELT Journal, 60, 76-78. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/30962013_Plagiarism_and_Overseas_Students_Stereotypes_Again.
Leite, E. L. (2009). Ensaio sobre plágio. In Leite, E. L. Plágio e outros estudos em direito de autor. Rio de Janeiro: Lumen Juris.
Lindahl, J., & Grace, D. (2018). Students’ and supervisors’ knowledge and attitudes regarding plagiarism and referencing. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 3. https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0054-2.
Lins, L., & Carvalho, F. M. (2014). Scientific integrity in Brazil. J Bioeth Inq [Internet], 11(3), 283-287. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24952507/.
López-Cozar, E. D. (2009). Claroscuros de la evaluación científica en España. Medes - Medicina en Español, 4, 25-29. https://digibug.ugr.es/bitstream/handle/10481/35911/Emilio%20Delgado%202010%20Claroscurosde%20la%20Evaluacion%20cientifica%20en%20España%20Boletin%20MEDES.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Manso, E. V. (1992). O que é direito autoral. São Paulo: Brasiliense.
Massano, J., & Ferreira, M. A. (2020). Integridade científica e académica em Portugal: um desígnio nacional. Acta Med Port., 33(1), 1-3.
Melo Niño, L., Soto-Ardila, L., Luengo-González, & R., Carvalho, J. L. (2019). Ideas About Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism with University Professors and Researchers: A Case Study with WebQDA. In Costa, A. P., Reis, L. P., & Moreira, A. (ed.). Computer supported qualitative research. Porto: Springer.
Mendes, K. D. S., Silveira, R. C. C. P., & Galvão, C. M. (2008). Revisão integrativa: método de pesquisa para a incorporação de evidências na saúde e na enfermagem. Texto e Contexto Enfermagem, 17(4), 758-764. https://www.scielo.br/j/tce/a/XzFkq6tjWs4wHNqNjKJLkXQ/abstract/?lang=pt.
Mendes-da-Silva, W., & Leal, C. C. (2021). Salami science in the age of open data: déjà lu and accountability in management and business research. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 25(1), e200194. https://www.scielo.br/j/rac/a/fpHjZ7zTcbMxyg6F7MSQjbP/?format=pdf&lang=en.
Mohamed, M. E., Mohy, N., & Salah, S. (2018). Perceptions of Undergraduate Pharmacy Students on Plagiarism in Three Major Public Universities in Egypt. Accountability in Research, 25(2), 109-124. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08989621.2018.1435997?needAccess=true.
Owens, C., & White, F. A. (2013). A 5-year systematic strategy to reduce plagiarism among frst-year psychology university students. Australian Journal of Psychology, 65(1), 14-21. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajpy.12005.
Palmeira, L. L. L., & Lima, W. M. (2024). Ciência x Ética: uma dualidade analisada pela vertente filosófica dos Direitos Humanos. In A ética como afirmação dos direitos humanos nas pesquisas científicas: (Re)ensinando saberes (pp. [13-página final]). São Carlos: Pedro & João Editores.
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. J Second Lang Writ., 12(4), 317-345. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ778822.
Pecorari, D. (2015). Academic writing and plagiarism: a linguistic analysis. Nova York: Bloomsbury.
Pompeo, D. A., Rossi, L. A., & Galvão, C. M. (2009). Revisão integrativa: etapa inicial do processo de validação de diagnóstico de enfermagem. Acta Paulista Enfermagem, 22(4), 434-438. https://www.scielo.br/j/ape/a/KCrFs8Mz9wG59KtQ5cKbGgK/abstract/?lang=pt.
Ramzan, M., Munir, M. A., Siddique, N., & Asif, M. (2012). Awareness about plagiarism amongst university students in Pakistan. Higher Education, 64, 73-84. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41477920.
Randall, M. (2001). Pragmatic plagiarism: authorship, profit, and power. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Rathore, F. A., Waqas, A., Zia, A. M., Mavrinac, M., & Farooq, F. (2015). Exploring the attitudes of medical faculty members and students in Pakistan towards plagiarism: a cross sectional survey. PeerJ, 3, e1031. https://peerj.com/articles/1031/.
Resnik, D. B., & Master, Z. (2013). Policies and initiatives aimed at addressing research misconduct in high-income countries. PLoS Med., 10(3), e1001406. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23555198/.
Rösing, C. K., & Cury, A. A. D. B. (2013). Self-plagiarism in scientific journals: an emerging discussion. Braz Oral Res, 27(6), 451-452. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24346040/.
Rubini, E. C. (2017). Ética na área científica. In Vargas, A. (org). Dimensionamento ético da intervenção profissional em educação física. Rio de Janeiro: Confef. https://bit.ly/3zcej9O.
Santos, C. C., Santos, P. S., Sant’ana, M. C., Masuda, H., Barboza, M. B., & Vasconcelos, S. M. R. (2017). Going beyond academic integrity might broaden our understanding of plagiarism in science education: a perspective from a study in Brazil. An Acad Bras Ciênc, 89, 757-771. https://www.scielo.br/j/aabc/a/xNytDrrrHdyK4XPcHBRJZmd/abstract/?lang=en.
Sauthier, M., Almeida Filho, A. J., Matheus, M. P., & Fonseca, P. M. L. (2011). Fraude e plágio em pesquisa e na ciência: motivos e repercussões. Rev Enf Ref, 3(3), 47-55. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/3882/388239962007.pdf.
Schroter, S., Roberts, J., Loder, E., Penzien, D. B., Mahadeo, S., & Houle, T. T. (2018). Biomedical authors’ awareness of publication ethics: an international survey. BMJ Open, 8, e021282. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/11/e021282.
Soares, C. B., Hoga, L. A. K., Peduzzi, M., Sangaleti, C., Yonekura, T., & Silva, D. R. A. D. (2014). Revisão integrativa: conceitos e métodos utilizados na enfermagem. Rev. Esc Enferm USP, 48(2), 335-345. https://www.scielo.br/j/reeusp/a/3ZZqKB9pVhmMtCnsvVW5Zhc/?format=pdf&lang=pt.
Sousa, L. M. M., Marques-Vieira, C. M. A., Severino, S. S. P., & Antunes, A. V. (2017). Metodologia de Revisão Integrativa da Literatura em Enfermagem. Revista Investigação Enfermagem, 21, 17-26. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321319742_Metodologia_de_Revisao_Integrativa_da_Literatura_em_Enfermagem.
Spinak E. (2013b). Ética editorial e o problema do plágio. SciELO em perspectiva, 2013 out 2. https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2013/10/02/etica-editorial-e-o-problema-do-plagio/#.Y3PLlnbMK3B.
Spinak, E. (2013a). Ética editorial e o problema do autoplágio. SciELO em perspectiva, 2013 nov 11. https://blog.scielo.org/blog/2013/11/11/etica-editorial-e-o-problema-do-autoplagio/#.Y3O_XXbMK3B.
The Office of Research Integrity. (2000). Definition of research misconduct. https://ori.hhs.gov/definition-research-misconduct.
Universidade Federal de Alagoas. (2022). Resolução nº 37/2022, de 07 de Junho de 2022. Aprova o regulamento geral dos programas de pós-graduação stricto sensu da UFAL. Maceió: Conselho Universitário. https://ufal.br/resolucoes/2022/rco-n-37-de-07-06-2022.pdf.
Vázquez, A. S. (2017). Ética. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira.
Wachowicz, M., & Lana, P. P. (2022). O direito de autor europeu entre mercados, flexibilidades e cultura: uma visão crítica. Revista de Direito Intelectual, 1, 181-210.
Wager, E., Barbour, V., Yentis, S., & Kleinert, S. (2009). Retractions: guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Croat Med J, 50(6), 532-535. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2802086/.
Xu, S., & Hu, G. (2021). A cross-disciplinary and severity-based study of author-related reasons for retraction. Accountability in Research, 29(8), 512-536. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08989621.2021.1952870.