Reuse in STEM research writing

dc.contributor.author

Pemberton, Michael

dc.contributor.author

Moskovitz, Cary

dc.contributor.author

Hall, Susanne

dc.contributor.author

Anson, Chris M

dc.date.accessioned

2020-10-17T02:12:55Z

dc.date.available

2020-10-17T02:12:55Z

dc.date.issued

2020-10-07

dc.date.updated

2020-10-17T02:12:54Z

dc.description.abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Text recycling (hereafter TR), sometimes problematically called “self-plagiarism,” involves the verbatim reuse of text from one’s own existing documents in a newly created text – such as the duplication of a paragraph or section from a published article in a new article. Although plagiarism is widely eschewed across academia and the publishing industry, the ethics of TR are not agreed upon and are currently being vigorously debated. As part of a federally funded (US) National Science Foundation grant, we have been studying TR patterns using several methodologies, including interviews with editors about TR values and practices (<jats:xref>Pemberton, Hall, Moskovitz, & Anson, 2019</jats:xref>) and digitally mediated text-analytic processes to determine the extent of TR in academic publications in the biological sciences, engineering, mathematical and physical sciences, and social, behavioral, and economic sciences (<jats:xref>Anson, Moskovitz, & Anson, 2019</jats:xref>). In this article, we first describe and illustrate TR in the context of academic writing. We then explain and document several themes that emerged from interviews with publishers of peer-reviewed academic journals. These themes demonstrate the vexed and unsettled nature of TR as a discursive phenomenon in academic writing and publishing. In doing so, we focus on the complex relationships between personal (role-based) and social (norm-based) aspects of scientific publication, complicating conventional models of the writing process that have inadequately accounted for authorial decisions about accuracy, efficiency, self-representation, adherence to existing or imagined rules and norms, perceptions of ownership and copyright, and fears of impropriety.</jats:p>

dc.identifier.issn

1461-0213

dc.identifier.issn

1570-5595

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/21611

dc.language

en

dc.publisher

John Benjamins Publishing Company

dc.relation.ispartof

AILA Review

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1075/aila.00033.ans

dc.title

Reuse in STEM research writing

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Moskovitz, Cary|0000-0001-5324-2407

pubs.begin-page

120

pubs.end-page

135

pubs.organisational-group

Trinity College of Arts & Sciences

pubs.organisational-group

Thompson Writing Program

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

33

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
AILA_Reuse in STEM research writing_2020.pdf
Size:
310.82 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version