Evaluation of a process and proforma for making consistent decisions about the seriousness of plagiarism incidents
MetadataShow full item record
Procedures for responding consistently to plagiarism incidents are neither clear‐cut nor easily implemented and yet inequitable treatment is intrinsically unfair. Classifying the seriousness of a plagiarism incident is problematic and penalties recommended for a given incident can vary greatly. This paper describes the development and testing of a classification framework for determining the degree of seriousness of a plagiarism incident using four criteria each on a continuum from least to most serious, and then classification into three overall levels. The classification scheme was trialled with academics using hypothetical plagiarism cases. Results suggest that the four criteria are useful and useable, and can assist in decision‐making, but that professional development for staff will be required to further improve consistency. The trial also revealed the knowledge and thinking processes of academics that might lead to inconsistent decisions.
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Yeo, Shelley (2007)This paper is a case study of first‐year science and engineering students’ understandings of plagiarism. Students were surveyed for their views on scenarios illustrating instances of plagiarism in the context of the ...
Self-Control, Injunctive Norms, and Descriptive Norms Predict Engagement in Plagiarism in a Theory of Planned Behavior ModelCurtis, G.; Cowcher, E.; Greene, B.; Rundle, K.; Paull, M.; Davis, Melissa (2018)© 2018 Springer Nature B.V. The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) predicts that a combination of attitudes, perceived norms, and perceived behavioral control predict intentions, and that intentions ultimately predict ...
Retracted: "Hydrogeochemical behavior of arsenic-enriched groundwater in the deltaic environment: Comparison between two study sites in West Bengal, India" [Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 99 (2008) 22-30]Mukherjee-Goswami, A.; Nath, B.; Jana, J.; Sahu, S.; Sarkar, M.; Jacks, G.; Bhattacharya, P.; Mukherjee, Abhijit; Polya, D.; Jean, J.; Chatterjee, D. (2012)The above paper has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy). This article has been retracted at the request of the Editors-in-Chief. Despite the ...