To what extent do people plagiarise
Plagiarism is defined in multiple ways in higher education institutions and universities. To name a few: Stanford sees plagiarism as “use, without giving reasonable and appropriate credit to or acknowledging the author or source, of another person's original work, whether such work is made up of code, formulas, ideas, language, research, strategies, writing or other form”;  Yale views plagiarism as “the use of another’s work, words, or ideas without attribution” which included “using a source’s language without quoting, using information from a source without attribution, and paraphrasing a source in a form that stays too close to the original”;  Princeton perceives plagiarism as the deliberate use of “someone else’s language, ideas, or other original (not common-knowledge) material without acknowledging its source”;  Oxford characterizes plagiarism as the use of “a writer's ideas or phraseology without giving due credit”;  and Brown explains plagiarism to be “appropriating another person's ideas or words (spoken or written) without attributing those word or ideas to their true source”.  As well-known institutions, they reflect a common academic definition of plagiarism. Lack of citation, giving credit, or attribution is considered to be plagiarism. In academics, committing plagiarism comes down to failing to cite sources. Self-plagiarism (also known as "recycling fraud") is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of one's own work without acknowledging that one is doing so or without citing the original work. Articles of this nature are often referred to as duplicate or multiple publication. In addition to the ethical issue, this can be illegal if copyright of the prior work has been transferred to another entity. Typically, self-plagiarism is only considered to be a serious ethical issue in settings where a publication is asserted to consist of new material, such as in...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document