The admissible amount of borrowings as a problem of organization of research work and of quality control

N. Avdeeva, T. Blinova, I. Gruzdev, V. M. Ledovskaya, G. Lobanova, I. Sus
{"title":"The admissible amount of borrowings as a problem of organization of research work and of quality control","authors":"N. Avdeeva, T. Blinova, I. Gruzdev, V. M. Ledovskaya, G. Lobanova, I. Sus","doi":"10.21686/1818-4243-2018-5-74-83","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the research . The determination of the permissible amount of non-original text in the automated verification of scientific documents for plagiarism has become a new, but already common phenomenon in Russia. The experience with the use of threshold values shows that it may have different effects on the final quality of such documents and therefore needs special consideration. The purpose of the article is to study the positive and negative consequences of using the allowable amount of borrowing. Methods and materials. Studying local normative acts, issued by national higher education institutions and the analysis of the results of anti-plagiarism tests carried out at the Russian State Library for research documents revealed certain peculiarities of application of the “threshold levels”. The results. The “threshold levels” usage would doubtlessly simplify the treatment of the plagiarism test results. In addition, authors of research works obtain a certain stimulus to more careful and thorough work over their papers, lecturers and academic advisors could detect compilation texts far easier than ever before. Meanwhile different organizations set different frames for volumes of borrowings when the same type of research work being considered, and there can be found no grounds related to the branches of science. The introduction of the restrictions on the amount of borrowing does not change the current Copyright legislation of the Russian Federation, nor does it make plagiarism legitimate.  In that respect a matter of a particular importance turns out to explain to students and postgraduates the main principles of scientific ethics and of the specific features of the plagiarism tests. A significant negative consequence of using the allowable amount of borrowing is that in different organizations the same text can be evaluated quite differently. The diversity of concepts of the admissible amount of borrowings makes it hard to compare the results of the plagiarism tests carried out at different establishments and determining a final level for the text quality. The admissible amount of borrowings would often correspond to the demand to quote other publications in the volumes justified by the aims of the quotation. The problems emerge when the number of the correct quotations satisfies the demand but their total volume exceeds the set frames. Another possible problem comes when the part of the borrowings fits those frames while the appropriateness of quotations remains questionable. The data on the borrowed volumes received by the primary computer plagiarism test cannot be considered objective if the volume of text taken by one author from another one’s work is viewed. To detect the degree of borrowings (either correct or incorrect) the report of the system on each of the documents is to be verified by the specialist. Since the year of 2009, the Russian State Library (RSL) has carried out over 4,000 plagiarism tests with usage of specialized software “Antiplagiat.RSL”. Documents were compared to the texts of the sources of the Digital Dissertation Library of the RSL, and the results of the tests revealed diverse forms of plagiarism. Conclusion. The organizational and methodological problems accompanying application of restrictions for borrowings remain unsolved for the moment. In addition, irrespective of the character of those restrictions the conclusion concerning the scientific value and the legitimacy of the research paper is to be made by the members of the academic community, not by the information systems.","PeriodicalId":55672,"journal":{"name":"Otkrytoe Obrazovanie Moskva","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Otkrytoe Obrazovanie Moskva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21686/1818-4243-2018-5-74-83","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The aim of the research . The determination of the permissible amount of non-original text in the automated verification of scientific documents for plagiarism has become a new, but already common phenomenon in Russia. The experience with the use of threshold values shows that it may have different effects on the final quality of such documents and therefore needs special consideration. The purpose of the article is to study the positive and negative consequences of using the allowable amount of borrowing. Methods and materials. Studying local normative acts, issued by national higher education institutions and the analysis of the results of anti-plagiarism tests carried out at the Russian State Library for research documents revealed certain peculiarities of application of the “threshold levels”. The results. The “threshold levels” usage would doubtlessly simplify the treatment of the plagiarism test results. In addition, authors of research works obtain a certain stimulus to more careful and thorough work over their papers, lecturers and academic advisors could detect compilation texts far easier than ever before. Meanwhile different organizations set different frames for volumes of borrowings when the same type of research work being considered, and there can be found no grounds related to the branches of science. The introduction of the restrictions on the amount of borrowing does not change the current Copyright legislation of the Russian Federation, nor does it make plagiarism legitimate.  In that respect a matter of a particular importance turns out to explain to students and postgraduates the main principles of scientific ethics and of the specific features of the plagiarism tests. A significant negative consequence of using the allowable amount of borrowing is that in different organizations the same text can be evaluated quite differently. The diversity of concepts of the admissible amount of borrowings makes it hard to compare the results of the plagiarism tests carried out at different establishments and determining a final level for the text quality. The admissible amount of borrowings would often correspond to the demand to quote other publications in the volumes justified by the aims of the quotation. The problems emerge when the number of the correct quotations satisfies the demand but their total volume exceeds the set frames. Another possible problem comes when the part of the borrowings fits those frames while the appropriateness of quotations remains questionable. The data on the borrowed volumes received by the primary computer plagiarism test cannot be considered objective if the volume of text taken by one author from another one’s work is viewed. To detect the degree of borrowings (either correct or incorrect) the report of the system on each of the documents is to be verified by the specialist. Since the year of 2009, the Russian State Library (RSL) has carried out over 4,000 plagiarism tests with usage of specialized software “Antiplagiat.RSL”. Documents were compared to the texts of the sources of the Digital Dissertation Library of the RSL, and the results of the tests revealed diverse forms of plagiarism. Conclusion. The organizational and methodological problems accompanying application of restrictions for borrowings remain unsolved for the moment. In addition, irrespective of the character of those restrictions the conclusion concerning the scientific value and the legitimacy of the research paper is to be made by the members of the academic community, not by the information systems.
作为研究工作组织和质量控制问题的可接受的借款数额
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信