Percepções e eficácia dos mecanismos de deteção de plágio em revistas científicas de Ciências Sociais espanholas, portuguesas e ibero-americanas
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v29i2.29097Palavras-chave:
Comissão editorial, ética, integridade académica, plágioResumo
Um dos maiores desafios enfrentados pelas comissões editoriais das revistas científicas está relacionado com a deteção de plágio nos manuscritos recebidos. Este estudo aborda esta questão com base na perceção dos membros das comissões editoriais de 166 revistas da área das Ciências Sociais no contexto ibero-americano indexadas no Scopus. As respostas foram recolhidas através de um questionário digital, tendo sido realizada uma análise quantitativa e qualitativa das informações fornecidas. Os resultados constatam que a maioria das revistas consultadas dispõe de software de deteção de plágio, havendo muitas razões a favor e contra a sua utilização. A maior parte dos artigos rejeitados nos processos de receção recorre ao autoplágio e ao plágio encoberto através de paráfrases. Nos casos de plágio, a maioria das revistas rejeita os manuscritos no processo de receção, embora seja de notar que mais de 15% dão aos autores a oportunidade de corrigir o erro e voltar a submeter o artigo. De um modo geral, conclui-se com base neste estudo que, apesar de tomar medidas preventivas, estas não garantem a erradicação do problema
Downloads
Referências
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
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Direitos de Autor (c) 2023 RELIEVE - Revista Electrónica de Investigación y Evaluación Educativa
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0.
Los autores ceden de forma no exclusiva los derechos de explotación de los trabajos publicados a RELIEVE (a los solos efectos de favorecer la difusión de los artículos publicados:firmar contratos de difusión, de integración en bases de datos, etc.) y consienten que se distribuyan bajo la licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento-Uso No Comercial 4.0 International (CC-BY-NC 4.0), que permite a terceros el uso de lo publicado siempre que se mencione la autoría de la obra y la fuente de publicación, y se haga uso sin fines comerciales.
Los autores pueden llegar a otros acuerdos contractuales adicionales e independientes, para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicado en esta revista (por ejemplo, incluyéndolo en un repositorio institucional o publicándolo en un libro), siempre y cuando se cite claramente que la fuente original de publicación es esta revista.
La mera remisión del artículo a RELIEVE supone la aceptación de estas condiciones.