Text Recycling in STEM Research: An Exploratory Investigation of Expert and Novice Beliefs and Attitudes

Cary Moskovitz Duke University ; Susanne Hall California Institute of Technology

Abstract

When writing journal articles, science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) researchers produce a number of other genres such as grant proposals and conference posters, and their new articles routinely build directly on their own prior work. As a result, STEM authors often reuse material from their completed documents in producing new documents. While this practice, known as text recycling (or self-plagiarism), is a debated issue in publishing and research ethics, little is known about researchers’ beliefs about what constitutes appropriate practice. This article presents results of from an exploratory, survey-based study on beliefs and attitudes toward text recycling among STEM “experts” (faculty researchers) and “novices” (graduate students and post docs). While expert and novice researchers are fairly consistent in distinguishing between text recycling and plagiarism, there is considerable disagreement about appropriate text recycling practice.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2021-07-01
DOI
10.1177/0047281620915434
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (26) · 1 in this index

  1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psycholo…
  2. Bazerman, C. (2003). Speech acts, genres, and activity systems: How texts organize activity and people. In …
  3. Bretag, T. & Carapiet, S. (2007). A preliminary study to identify the extent of self-pl…
  4. 10.1080/08989621.2014.848071
  5. Collberg, C. & Kobourov, S. (2005). Self-plagiarism in computer science. Communications…
Show all 26 →
  1. Committee on Publication Ethics. (2013). Text recyling guidelines …
  2. Devitt, A. (1991). Intertextuality in Tax Accounting: Generic, Referential, and Functional. In C. Bazerman, &…
  3. Eaton, S. E. & Crossman, K. (2018). Self-plagiarism research literature in the social sciences: A scoping rev…
  4. 10.1007/s11948-010-9214-6
  5. García-Romero, A. & Estrada-Lorenzo, J. M. (2014). A bibliometric analysis of plagiarism and self-plagiarism …
  6. 10.1080/08989621.2018.1434622
  7. Halupa, C. & Bolliger, D. U. (2013). Faculty perceptions of student self plagiarism: An exploratory multi-uni…
  8. Halupa, C. & Bolliger, D. U. (2015). Student perceptions of self-plagiarism: A multi-university exploratory s…
  9. Halupa, C., Breitenbach, E. & Anast, A. (2016). A self-plagiarism intervention for doctoral students: A quali…
  10. Horbach, S. S. & Halffman, W. W. (2017). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism…
  11. Howard, R. M. & Watson, M. (2010). The scholarship of plagiarism: Where we've been, where we are, what's need…
  12. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  13. 10.1186/s41073-017-0025-z
  14. 10.1007/s11948-017-0008-y
  15. 10.1007/s11948-009-9178-6
  16. Learned Publishing
  17. Roig, M. (2005). Re-using text from one's own previously published papers: An exploratory study of potential …
  18. Roig M. (2015). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing pr…
  19. Scanlon, P. M. (2007). Song from myself: an anatomy of self-plagiarism. Plagiary: Cross…
  20. Scott, D. P. &Lorraine C. S. (1986). Duplicate publication: An increasing problem. Coun…
  21. 10.1007/s10805-014-9223-1