Percepciones y eficacia de los mecanismos de detección de plagio en revistas científicas de Ciencias Sociales españolas, portuguesas e iberoamericanas

  1. Espiñeira Bellón, Eva María 1
  2. Muñoz Cantero, Jesús Miguel 1
  3. Porto Castro, Ana María 2
  4. Mosteiro García, María Josefa 2
  1. 1 Universidade da Coruña
    info

    Universidade da Coruña

    La Coruña, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01qckj285

  2. 2 Universidade de Santiago de Compostela
    info

    Universidade de Santiago de Compostela

    Santiago de Compostela, España

    ROR https://ror.org/030eybx10

Journal:
Relieve: Revista ELectrónica de Investigación y EValuación Educativa

ISSN: 1134-4032

Year of publication: 2023

Issue Title: Integridad Académica en la Era de la Inteligencia Artificial Generativa- Academic integrity in the era of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)

Volume: 29

Issue: 2

Type: Article

DOI: 10.30827/RELIEVE.V29I2.29097 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Relieve: Revista ELectrónica de Investigación y EValuación Educativa

Abstract

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.

Bibliographic 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
Data source: Dialnet