The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’

Among the various forms of academic misconduct, text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’ holds a particularly contentious position as a new way to game the reward system of science. A recent case of alleged ‘self-plagiarism’ by the prominent Dutch economist Peter Nijkamp has attracted much public and regulatory attention in the Netherlands. During the Nijkamp controversy, it became evident that many questions around text recycling have only partly been answered and that much uncertainty still exists. While the conditions of fair text reuse have been specified more clearly in the wake of this case, the extent and causes of problematic text recycling remain unclear. In this study, we investigated the extent of problematic text recycling in order to obtain understanding of its occurrence in four research areas: biochemistry & molecular biology, economics, history and psychology. We also investigated some potential reasons and motives for authors to recycle their text, by testing current hypotheses in scholarly literature regarding the causes of text recycling. To this end, an analysis was performed on 922 journal articles, using the Turnitin plagiarism detection software, followed by close manual interpretation of the results. We observed considerable levels of problematic text recycling, particularly in economics and psychology, while it became clear that the extent of text recycling varies substantially between research fields. In addition, we found evidence that more productive authors are more likely to recycle their papers. In addition, the analysis provides insight into the influence of the number of authors and the existence of editorial policies on the occurrence of problematic text recycling.     

Journal Peer Review and Editorial Evaluation: Cautious Innovator or Sleepy Giant?

Minerva - Peer review of journal submissions has become one of the most important pillars of quality management in academic publishing. Because of growing concerns with the quality and...     

To Score or Not to Score: Factors Influencing Performance and Feasibility of Automatic Content Scoring of Text Responses

In this article, we systematize the factors influencing performance and feasibility of automatic content scoring methods for short text responses. We argue that performance (i.e., how well an automatic system agrees with human judgments) mainly depends on the linguistic variance seen in the responses and that this variance is indirectly influenced by other factors such as target population or input modality. Extending previous work, we distinguish conceptual, realization, and nonconformity variance, which are differentially impacted by the various factors. While conceptual variance relates to different concepts embedded in the text responses, realization variance refers to their diverse manifestation through natural language. Nonconformity variance is added by aberrant response behavior. Furthermore, besides its performance, the feasibility of using an automatic scoring system depends on external factors, such as ethical or computational constraints, which influence whether a system with a given performance is accepted by stakeholders. Our work provides (i) a framework for assessment practitioners to decide a priori whether automatic content scoring can be successfully applied in a given setup as well as (ii) new empirical findings and the integration of empirical findings from the literature on factors that influence automatic systems' performance.