Perceptions and effectiveness of plagiarism detection mechanisms in Spanish, Portuguese and Latin American Social Sciences journals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v29i2.29097Keywords:
editorial boards, ethics, academic integrity, plagiarismAbstract
One of the greatest challenges faced by the editorial boards of scientific journals is related to the detection of plagiarism in the manuscripts received. This study addresses this issue based on the perception of the members of editorial committees of 166 journals in the field of Social Sciences in the Ibero-American context indexed in Scopus. The responses were collected through a digital questionnaire, and a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the information provided was conducted. The results show that most of the journals consulted have plagiarism detection software, with numerous reasons for and against its use. Most of the articles discarded in the reception processes include self-plagiarism and covert plagiarism through paraphrasing. In cases of plagiarism, most journals reject manuscripts in the reception process, although it is noteworthy that more than 15% give authors the opportunity to correct the error and resubmit the paper. This study concludes that, despite taking preventive measures, these do not guarantee the eradication of such a problem.
Downloads
References
Baiget, T. (2010). Ética en revistas científicas. Revista de Sistemas de Información y Documentación, 4, 59-65. https://doi.org/10.54886/ibersid.v4i.3873
Baskaran, S., Agarwal, A., Panner-Selvam, M.K., Henkel, R., Durairajanayagam, D., Leisegang, K., Majzoub, A., Singh, D., & Khalafalla, K. (2019). Is there plagiarism in the most influential publications in the field of andrology? First International Journal of Andrology Andrologia, 51(10), e13405. https://doi.org/10.1111/and.13405
Becker, A., & Lukka, K. (2022). Instrumentalism and the publish-or-perish regime. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 102436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2022.102436
Bretag, T., & Carapiet, S. (2007). A preliminary study to determine the extent of self-plagiarism in Australian academic research. Plagiary: Cross-Disciplinary. Studies in Plagiarism, Fabrication and Falsification, 2(5), 92-103. https://bit.ly/3kvZq02
Bruton. S.V., & Rachal, J.R. (2015). Education Journal Editors’ Perspectives on Self-Plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13, 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-014-9224-0
Comas, R., Lancaster, T., Curiel, E., & Touza, C. (2023). Automatic paraphrasing tools: an unexpected consequence of addressing student plagiarism and the impact of COVID in distance education settings. Práxis Educativa, 18, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5212/PraxEduc.v.18.21679.020
Debnath, J. (2016). Plagiarism: A silent epidemic in scientific writing - reasons, recognition and remedies. Medical Journal Armed Forces India, 72(2), 164-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2016.03.010
Debnath, J., & Cariappa, M.P. (2018). Wishing away plagiarism in scientific publications! Will it work? A situational analysis of plagiarism policy of journals in PubMed. Medical Journal Armed Forces India, 74(2), 143-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mjafi.2017.09.003
Domínguez-Aroca, M.I. (2012). Lucha contra el plagio desde las bibliotecas universitarias. El Profesional de la Información, 21(5), 498-503. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2012.sep.08
Fernández-Cano, A. (2022). Parasitismo académico. Torres editores.
Foltýnek, T., Dlabolová, D., Anohina-Naumeca, A., Razı, S., Kravjar, J., Kamzola, L., ... & Weber-Wulff, D. (2020). Testing of support tools for plagiarism detection. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00192-4
Giménez-Toledo, E. (2015). La evaluación de la producción científica: breve análisis crítico. Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa (RELIEVE), 21(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.7203/relieve.21.1.5160
Gorard, S., & Taylor, C. (2004). Combining methods in educational and social research. Open University Press.
Higgins, J.R., Lin, F.C., & Evans, J.P. (2016). Plagiarism in submitted manuscripts: incidence, characteristics and optimization of screening-case study in a major specialty medical journal. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0021-8
Horbach, S. S., & Halffman, W. W. (2019). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’. Research policy, 48(2), 492-502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.004
Jia, X., Tan, X., & Zhang, Y. (2014). Replication of the methods section in biosciences papers: is it plagiarism? Scientometrics, 98, 337–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1033-5
Jordan, S. R., & Hill, K. Q. (2012). Ethical assurance statements in political science journals. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10, 243-250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10805-012-9163-6
Kittleson, M. (1997). Determining effective follow-up of e-mail surveys”. American Journal of Health Behavior. 21(3), 193-196.
Krokoscz, M. (2021). Plagiarism in articles published in journals indexed in the Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library (SPELL): a comparative analysis between 2013 and 2018. International Journal for Educational Integrity 17, art. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-00063-5
Matías-Guiu, J., & García-Ramos, M. (2010). Fraude y conductas inapropiadas en las publicaciones científicas. Neurología. Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Neurología, 25(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0213-4853(10)70015-3
Monzón-Pérez M.E., Oviedo-Herrera L.C., Sánchez-Ferrán, T., Valdés-Balbín, R., Camayd-Viera I., & Calero-Ricardo, J.L. (2020). Plagio en artículos de investigación en revistas biomédicas cubanas. 2016. Revista Habanera de Ciencias Médicas, 19(4), e3526. https://bit.ly/3QY73YY
Muñoz-Borja, P., Hernández-Ruíz, P., & Escobar-Sarria, J. (2016). La política editorial antifraude de las revistas científicas españolas e iberoamericanas del JCR en Ciencias Sociales. Comunicar, 48(24), 19-27. https://doi.org/10.3916/C48-2016-02
Muñoz-Cantero, J.M. (2017). Competencias transversales en la investigación. Ser y estar en la red. Aula Magna 2.0. [Blog]: https://cuedespyd.hypotheses.org/2977
Muñoz-Cantero, J.M. (2018). ¿Plagio o coincidencia? Principal causa de rechazo de los artículos científicos. Aula Magna 2.0. [Blog]: https://cuedespyd.hypotheses.org/3374
Pamies-Berenguer, M., Cascales-Martínez, A., & Gomariz-Vicente, M. A. (2022). Factores condicionantes de la transferencia de la formación y la probabilidad de transferencia. RELIEVE, 28(2), art. 7. http://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v28i2.24604
Pastor, J. (2018). Plagiarism in publications. Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología, 93(12), 571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oftal.2018.10.024
Pupovac, V. (2021). The frequency of plagiarism identified by text-matching software in scientific articles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientometrics, 126(11), 8981-9003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04140-5
Pupovac, V., & Fanelli, D. (2015). Scientists admitting to plagiarism: a meta-analysis of surveys. Science and engineering ethics, 21, 1331-1352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9600-6
Resnik, D. B., Patrone, D., & Peddada, S. (2010). Research misconduct policies of social science journals and impact factor. Accountability in research, 17(2), 79-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621003641181
Reyes, H. (2009). El plagio en publicaciones científicas. Revista Médica de Chile, 137, 7-9. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0034-98872009000100001
Sarabipour, S., Debat, H. J., Emmott, E., Burgess, S. J., Schwessinger, B., & Hensel, Z. (2019). On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective. PLoS biology, 17(2), e3000151. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000151
Schroter, S., Roberts, J., Loder, E., Penzien, D.B., Mahadeo, S., & Houle,T.T. (2018). Biomedical authors' awareness of publication ethics: an international survey. British Medical Journal Open, 8(11), e021282. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021282
Sheehan, K. B., & Hoy, N. G. (1997). Using e-mail to survey Internet users in the United States: Methodology and assessment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(3), https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00101.x
Smart, P., & Gaston, T. (2019). How prevalent are plagiarized submissions? Global survey of editors. Learned Publishing, 32(1), 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1218
Solís-Sánchez, G., Cano-Garcinuño, A., Anton-Gamero, M., Alsina-Manrique de Lara, L., & Rey-Galán, C. (2018). Plagio y ética en las publicaciones científicas. Anales de Pediatría, 90(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpedi.2018.10.008
Taylor, D.B. (2017). Plagiarism in manuscripts submitted to the AJR: development of an optimal screening algorithm and management pathways. American Journal of Roentgenology, 209(1). https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17208
Teddlie, C., & Tashkkori, A. (2009). Foundations of Mixed Methods Research. Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Sage.
Thomas, A. (2019). Plagiarism in South African management journals: a follow-up study. South African Journal of Science, 115(5/6), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2019/5723
Wager, E., & Wiffen, P.J. (2011). Ethical issues in preparing and publishing systematic reviews. Journal of Evidence Based Medicine, 4(2), 130-134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-5391.2011.01122.x
Wen‑Yau, C.L. (2020). Self‑plagiarism in academic journal articles: from the perspectives of international editors‑in‑chief in editorial and COPE case. Scientometrics,123, 299-319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03373-0
Williams, P., & Wager, E. (2013). Exploring why and how journal editors retract articles: findings from a qualitative study. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9292-0
White, C. (2005). Suspected research fraud: difficulties of getting at the truth. BMJ, 331(7511), 281-288. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7511.281
Yu-Chih, S. (2013). Do journal authors plagiarize? Using plagiarism detection software to uncover matching text across disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 264-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.07.002
Zhang H.Y. (2010). CrossCheck: an effective tool for detecting plagiarism. Learned Publishing, 23, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1087/20100103
Zúñiga-Vargas, J.P. (2020). Comportamiento ético en la publicación científica: malas conductas y acciones para evitarlas. Revista Educación, 44(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.15517/revedu.v44i1.35548

Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 RELIEVE – Electronic Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The authors grant non-exclusive rights of exploitation of works published to RELIEVE and consent to be distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial Use 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0), which allows third parties to use the published material whenever the authorship of the work and the source of publication is mentioned, and it is used for non-commercial purposes.
The authors can reach other additional and independent contractual agreements, for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (for example, by including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), as long as it is clearly stated that the Original source of publication is this magazine.
Authors are encouraged to disseminate their work after it has been published, through the internet (for example, in institutional archives online or on its website) which can generate interesting exchanges and increase work appointments.
The fact of sending your paper to RELIEVE implies that you accept these conditions.