I have a question about plagiarism.

If a peer reviewer writes a negative review of a paper and rejects it, so that he or she can use the idea of the paper in their own work is that considered plagiarism?

Similarly, if a peer reviewer lifts sentences from a submitted, but rejected manuscript into their own paper is that considered plagiarism?

And if you have a strong suspicion either of those two have happened (e.g. you see a publication appear after a while with exactly the same phrasing as your submitted manuscript), is there anything you can do about it?

I am in a debate regarding tables developed for a literature review which include Author, Year, Type of Study, Methods, and Results. I believe all components of the table should be paraphrased, but a colleague directly copied methods and results which has resulted in a debate. Is this direct copying of these materials plagiarism or considered fair use as it applies to a literature review?

Note: The copied material is anywhere from one to seven sentences total for each reference for methods and results.

Note 2: I should also note this was in a table we previously stated we created and there is no indication the material is directly copied.

I’ve read today a paper about my research field that seems similar to my submission (rejected) to a conference. It includes ideas, some scientific elements, and concepts but is not exactly a word-to-word copy of my work. I’m not sure this is plagiarism.

Could you guide me how to investigate this issue? Is there any way to find who had access to my submission in a double blind review?

Last year, I was helping a colleague with statistical analysis. Originally, I was on the paper but after a personal falling out with this colleague, I removed myself as a co-author. Because I am passionate about open science, I told them that they could use the analysis I did (and the computational script I wrote to do the analysis) for their paper. I did not explicitly ask to be credited.

The paper has been published in a relatively good journal. The authors used my analysis but also used my exact words in the methods section from a write-up of the methods and results. It is around 2 paragraphs of direct copy-and-paste. They have also published the computational script along with the paper and have not changed it in anyway (it still has my settings for setting the working directory path on my computer).

I have copies of my original analyses.

On one hand, you could say: what did you think was going to happen? And – you don’t have a leg to stand on. However, I am quite irked that they lazily copy and pasted my words into their paper without even attempting to make it their own in any way.

What would you do in this situation? Anything? Suck it up and move on?

EDIT: They also use figures I made in their paper.

Last year, I was helping a colleague with a statistical analysis. Originally, I was on the paper but after a personal falling out with the colleague, I removed myself as a co-author. Because I am passionate about open science, I told them that they could use the analysis I did (and the computational script I wrote to the do the analysis) for their paper. I did not explicitly ask to be accredited.

The paper has been published in a relatively good journal. The authors used my analysis but also used my exact words in the methods section from a write up of the methods and results. It is around 2 paragraphs of direct copy-and-paste. They have also published the computational script along with the paper and have not changed it in anyway (it still has my settings for setting the working directory path on my computer).

I have copies of my original analyses.

On one hand, you could say: what did you think was going to happen? And – you don’t have a leg to stand on.

However, I am quite irked that they lazily copy and pasted my words into their paper without even attempting to make it their own in any way.

What would you do in this situation? Anything? Suck it up and move on?

EDIT: They also use figures I made in their paper.

Recently I came across a conference paper that tried to solve the same problem I solved couple of years ago and published a workshop publication about, but using a different algorithm. In their introduction they mention and cite 6 applications that can benefit from the solution to this specific problem. Out of the 6 examples 4 are exactly the same in my publication word for word with 3 of them using the same exact citations I used. Which made me believe with zero doubt that the one of the conference paper authors read my workshop paper and found those applications and citations useful and decided to reuse them in their publication without giving my work proper citation for finding those references.

I have read through academia stack previous questions and all questions I found were researchers trying to figure out if citing the source without citing the middle resource was okay:

  1. Attributing Second-order Citations
  2. I have found theses on a similar subject to my own, and want to use
    their references with my own text and a similar flow. Is this
    plagiarism?
  3. Citing a citation from a paper?
  4. Is it okay to incorporate a block of citations from a review paper
    into my own paper?
  5. Is there a problem with citing the original source instead of the
    source where the information was first found?
  6. If I use most of the references from a thesis but not the exact
    same sentences, is it plagiarism?

The consensus form the answers of these questions is that the middle resource should be also cited.

Since in my case my work was not cited at all, I contacted the conference committee chair about this issue and showed that the citations I have used have been reused in the paper that was accept in his conference without citing my work. His response was “this related work discussion does not amount to plagiarism.” and continued to say that if I am not satisfied with his conclusion that I can contact the journal and ask them for a full investigation of this issue.

So currently I am a little bit conflicted, is this a case of plagiarism? If so how can I proof that it is a clear case plagiarism to avoid a similar response from the journal editors.

Recently I came across a conference paper that tried to solve the same problem I solved couple of years ago and published a workshop publication about, but using a different algorithm. In their introduction they mention and cite 6 applications that can benefit from the solution to this specific problem. Out of the 6 examples 4 are exactly the same in my publication with 3 of them using the same exact citations I used. Which made me believe with zero doubt that the one of the conference paper authors read my workshop paper and found those applications and citations useful and decided to reuse them in their publication without giving my work proper citation for finding those references.

I have read through academia stack previous questions and all questions I found were researchers trying to figure out if citing the source without citing the middle resource was okay:

  1. Attributing Second-order Citations
  2. I have found theses on a similar subject to my own, and want to use
    their references with my own text and a similar flow. Is this
    plagiarism?
  3. Citing a citation from a paper?
  4. Is it okay to incorporate a block of citations from a review paper
    into my own paper?
  5. Is there a problem with citing the original source instead of the
    source where the information was first found?
  6. If I use most of the references from a thesis but not the exact
    same sentences, is it plagiarism?

The consensus form the answers of these questions is that the middle resource should be also cited.

Since in my case my work was not cited at all, I contacted the conference committee chair about this issue and showed that the citations I have used have been reused in the paper that was accept in his conference without citing my work. His response was “this related work discussion does not amount to plagiarism.” and continued to say that if I am not satisfied with his conclusion that I can contact the journal and ask them for a full investigation of this issue.

So currently I am a little bit conflicted, is this a case of plagiarism? If so how can I proof that it is a clear case plagiarism to avoid a similar response from the journal editors.

I am a final year undergraduate student reading for Bsc. Electrical and information Engineering. As for the final year project, I am planning to do a project on deep learning. After doing some literature survey I found a research paper that goes along with my research interest, and the project code is also available in GitHub.I want to recreate the research paper and do some additional changes to their research methodology and evaluate the results.I just want to know if it is a plagiarism to use that code, and will there be any obligations, if I am to write a research paper using my experimental results including the additional changes to the research.

Thanks in advance and sorry If am being naive, as I am new to this domain. If some one could be of any help to clarify this, it would be of great help.

The scenario:

  • in an article, found a point/claim/fact that would fit/support perfectly a broader point I’m trying to construct (@Related works section)

The dilemma:

  • Whom to cite?
    • a) only the article in which I found the [whole] point/claim/synthesis
    • b) the original sources, the author cited during his construction of the point
    • c) both i.e. the complete paragraph or part of the paragraph that serves my purpose

Pros and cons:

  • a)
    • Pro: I pay proper respect to the author from whom I learnt about the sources/facts. + the article is the only source I really read
    • Con: I would have single reference to support the point, while in reality it there are several relevant sources (used by the author)
  • b)

    • Pro: I would provide the reader with deeper/direct references for further researching
    • Con: it is a form of plagiarism, as it would seem that it was me that read all the sources and drawn conclusion presented. The conclusion is not the issue, I discuss that particular point anyway (in my paper), but the first part bothers me: it wasn’t me that studied all that sources, but the author
  • c) seems to me as just solution but I’m not sure how it should be formulated so it is clear for reader what is reference (let it be: [1]) from the article and what (sub) references are just taken from the article (let them be: [1.a] [1.b])

Alternatively, (and this is what I would normally do):
– I follow his references, find the articles, read them and then use (some or all of) them together with other references (known to me from earlier research). The issue with such practice: too often there is no justification for referencing his article — and it seems not to be not right i.e. smells to me like a tiny plagiarism-sin.


The example:

….

To achieve the first goal, the crawler has to visit as many web sites as possible, and to achieve the second goal, the crawler has to
maintain the freshness of the previously visited web sites, which can
be achieved by re-visiting such web sites in a routinely manner. In
the following, the most frequently used re-visiting policies are
summarized: (1) Uniform policy: in this policy, the entire web sites
are downloaded at each visit (Bhute and Meshram, 2010; Pichler et al.,
2011; Leng et al., 2011; Sharma et al., 2012; Singh and Vikasn, 2014).
Although this approach enriches the databases, it requires a large
processing time. (2) Proportional policy: this policy is performed in
many ways, such as: • Downloading only the pages that have a rank more
than a threshold value specified by the crawler administrator (Bhute
and Meshram, 2010;)

From the article:

ALQARALEH, S., RAMADAN, O., & SALAMAH, M. (2015). Efficient watcher
based web crawler design. Aslib Journal of Information Management,
67(6), 663–686. http://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-02-2015-0019

In my article I want to explain/define these two policies, together with his remarks, my own remarks, and, potentially, to expand (support) it with other sources.


I’m not sure if I formulated the issue properly, so please, do not hesitate to demand clarification. Any comments/thoughts are welcome, even if you are not sure what would be the right way.

Thanks in advance!

I am working in a sub-field of computer science (deep learning), more specifically a particular application of LSTMs to learn simple functions. My work is building on the work of another researcher to an extent that I am using the same model, parameters and problem definition. I am writing a research paper based on my findings.

My work is different in the sense that I am introducing some different concepts from another area and trying to make a generalisation about the very nature of ANNs (using his work as an intermediary). And since his work is the only such publication till now, I am taking some things directly in my work eg. Problem Definition or Model.

So the question is whether it will count as plagiarism? If yes then how can I circumvent it as I have to write many things as it is, there’s no other way to get around that as I am using them as it is.