Abstract
Introduction:
Plagiarism is defined as intentional deceiving or lack of honesty, which deprives others from both material and spiritual possessions. Ethics is considered as one of the most important aspects of evaluating the quality of higher education. Moreover, scientific ethics should be reflected from university values, as a specialized institution, rather than being a reflection of the others cares. Therefore, the main aim of the present study is explore of expert experiences about plagiarism in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.
Materials and Methods:
This study employed qualitative method with using in-deep interview. The research participants consisted of 21, who tend to this work. Semi structure interview were conducted and recorded. The method of analyzing data was ‘thematic analysis’. The data were transcribed and saved on computer after each interview. Themes and sub-themes were extracted. Finally, relevant sub-themes were arranged in a category and suggested were presented.
Result:
Analyzing data showed 600 primary codes, 40 sub-themes and 6 themes. The main themes included repeated works, non-normative adoption, non-normative adaptation, shares distribution, forging, and profit-seeking, each of which consisted of one or several subgroups.
Conclusion:
The findings of this study show that since, there are numerous ways of cheating, the universities’ research committees must create institutions in order to educate the individuals how to avoid plagiarism. In addition, providing information about different types of scientific violations, as well as their following punishments might lead to the decrease of such misbehaviors.
Keywords: Experiences, Isfahan of medical science university, plagiarism
INTRODUCTION
Plagiarism is, in fact, the counterpoint of the university. It deceives the reader and, at the same time, hurts the author both materially and spiritually. Nevertheless, the spiritual aspect is believed to be more influential in destroying the scientific community. Plagiarism stops the science from improving, causes scientific stagnation, and finally, instead of producing science, leads to the creation of the vicious circle of science.
Plagiarism is defined as intentional deceiving or lack of honesty, which deprives others from both material and spiritual possessions.[1] In addition, it means taking other people's work as one's own without asking for their permission.[2]
Propagation of plagiarism and superficial views toward this important issue, both, lead to damaging the values of the scientific communities and their certificates, as well as possessions. Moreover, since distrust destroys the motivation for performing scientific researches, real producers of science, such as scientists and authors, will either produce no scientific works or move away from such communities.
In general, there exists much information regarding the incidences of cheating; however, there is limited amount of information about the prevalence of its various forms. Therefore, scientific activists, as well as the consumers of scientific productions should be well educated regarding plagiarism.[3]
Increasing of educational centers, high rate of scientific production and publication of it, as well as simple access to the results of researches due to the development of Information Technology can all lead to damaging the science. Therefore, a solution must be provided in order to prevent such violations. The ideal university must reflect the premier moral values in both scientific environments and academic activities; i.e., the university should reflect such values in its goals, views, and programs.[4]
Several works have been conducted on material, as well as intellectual property rights, cheating, and plagiarism, both inside and outside Iran.[3,5,6,7] However, there are a limited number of researches investigating experiences of expert about plagiarism.
Some experts believe plagiarism is endemic in most countries.[5] While performing their activities, researchers, authors, publishers, and translators might, whether consciously or unconsciously, commit plagiarism. In general, according to some scholars plagiarism has been classified into different categories: intentional vs. unintentional,[8] direct vs. indirect,[9] and weak, average, and intense.[5] However, there are limited types of plagiarism in Iran. Moreover, it has been claimed that plagiarism exists in a lot of theses, as well as results.[5]
When the higher education's demand increases for scientific production and globalization, sensitivity to its validation and quality assurance increases, as well.[10] Ethics is considered as one of the most important aspects of evaluating the quality of higher education.[11] Moreover, scientific ethics should be reflected from university values, as a specialized institution, rather than being a reflection of the others cares.[12] In addition, specialists, particularly in medical sciences, can understand ethics only by understanding their professional activities, the philosophy behind them, and their relationship with people's life.[13]
Plagiarism provides a context for other scientific misbehaviors in future occupation of the medical students;[14] since, they have great interaction with people, so this issue is very important. However, the main aim of the present study is explore of expert experiences about plagiarism in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. The findings of the present study could lead the researchers toward a more scientific literature and a closer level to the global standards.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study employed qualitative method with using in-deep interview. Participants were chosen from Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, in 2011 and included academic staff who faced plagiarism, ethic committee members, thesis and articles referees, academic promotion committee, and university journal editors. The study uses a purposeful sampling technique to recruit participants, and recruiting continued until data saturation was achieved (Lois, 2003). The research participants consisted of 21, who tend to this work. Semi structure interview were conducted and recorded. Interview duration was varied between 30 to 60 min. Validity of interviewer was gained by supervisor guides in some pilots’ interviews. The method of analyzing data was ‘thematic analysis’. The data were transcribed and saved on computer after each interview. Also marginal remarks like; silence, expressions etc., were entered in this stage. Data were read several times for immersion and then they were divided to semantic units in main paragraphs and sentences. Semantic units were reviewed several times again. Themes and sub-themes were extracted. Finally, relevant sub-themes were arranged in a category and suggested were presented.[15]
The autonomous of participants were considered. This research also adopted the conditions of the University ethic committee and now it is approved.
RESULTS
In this research, participants are Isfahan university faculty members, which consist of the 3 ethic committee members, 3 academic promotion committee members, 2 research committee members, 5 thesis and articles referees, 4 university journal editors, 1 director, 2 research chancellor and 1 publisher.
Analyzing data showed 600 primary codes, 40 sub-themes and 6 themes. The main themes included repeated works, non-normative adoption, non-normative adaptation, shares distribution, forging, and profit-seeking, each of which consisted of one or several subgroups [Table 1].
Table 1.
Subject and sub-subject about plagiarism with use of experiment's expert
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The present study aimed to investigate the instances of plagiarism by using experiences of the experts in Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Considering the first objective of the study; i.e., identifying experiences of experts about plagiarism, the results can be classified into 6 main themes: repeated works, non-normative adoption, non-normative adaptation, distributing shares, forging, and profit-seeking and their sub-themes. The results appear in Table 2.
Table 2.
Kinds of plagiarism in different forms and ways
In previous studies, Nakhaee, et al.[6] found and categorized 48 cases of research misconduct. This study found 11 identical cases also. Result of Wood MJ.[16] study about doing repeated works, are consistent with this study. Result of Zaker salehi G.[3] study about creating certificates is consistent with our study. One of plagiarism is coping internet pictures and images without citation. Roberts TS.[17] claims that downloading part or total of works, pictures and etc., in the internet without appreciate or cite, is plagiarism. Our studies prove his claim.
Khaki Sedigh A.[7] in his study, mentions to fabrications. This study proves his claim. Also, results of Bouville M.[18] showed; citing to references without seeing is plagiarism. Our results are as same as his result. Chun Hua S.[19] calls students fraud in assignments as dishonesty in university. Results of this study are consistent with his study. Also, our finding prove Pimple K.[20] claims about authorship granted or requested.
In case plagiarism occurs due to the individuals’ lack of knowledge, educational groups can play an important role in preventing this misbehavior.
Overall, prevention is better than cure; therefore, the grounds for cheating and plagiarism must be identified and eradicated.
As the results of the present study depict, eradicating the working pressure (the professors’ presenting articles for their promotion), lack of time, intense competition (gaining privilege for entering different educational levels in universities), money making (doing research works for money), insufficient education (in the educational system and the libraries), and lack of knowledge regarding the abomination of plagiarism in universities can lead to preventing such misbehaviors.
The findings of this study also show that since, there are numerous ways of cheating, the universities’ research committees must create institutions in order to educate the individuals about how to avoid plagiarism. In addition, providing information about different types of scientific violations, as well as their following punishments might lead to the decrease of such misbehaviors. It is also quite effective in increasing the information existing in the country's legal system for upgrading the related laws and regulations.
Various studies conducted on the issue reveal cheating in different majors and even different countries to be endemic.[5] Therefore, different universities, as well as majors must study the typology of cheating and plagiarism; so that, regarding the present conditions, necessary planning, preventing, and education can be provided by the related institutions. More studies are also needed to be conducted on identifying the reasons why people commit cheating or plagiarism. Finally, since the libraries and their information sources play a major role in producing science, the librarians must voluntarily give their users information about cheating and plagiarism.
Due to the difference in the nature of various majors, the results of the present study cannot be generalized to all universities or majors.
Footnotes
Source of Support: Nil
Conflict of Interest: None declared.
REFERENCES
- 1. [Last Accessed on 2011 Feb 05]. Available from: http://dictionary.lexis nexis.com/Default.aspx?typed=plagiarism and type=1 .
- 2.USA: The MIT Press; 2004. [Last accessed on 2011 Feb 10]. Case study in biomedical research ethics. Available from: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/577/01/MTF (2004) [Google Scholar]
- 3.Zaker Salehi GH. Tehran: Motaleat Farhangi Va Ejtemaee; 1389. Plagiarism: Social and legal. [Google Scholar]
- 4.Asghari F. Tilted load will not to the house. Sepid Magazine [persian] 2011;5:2–13. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Nakhaee N, Najafi pour H, Rouhani A, Raftari Sh, Mobasher M, Hasani F. Proposed regulation misconduct: A qualitative study. Steps of developing in medical education. SDME. 2011;7:1–8. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Nakhaee N, Nikpour H. The study of medical students working in deception research thesis and frequency of compiling it. Steps of developing in medical education SDME. 2005;2:10–7. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Khaki Sedigh A. Tehran: Khje Nasire Toosi; 2011. An introduction to research ethics and engineering ethics. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ryan G, Bonanno H. Undergraduate and post graduate pharmacy students’ perceptions of plagiarism and academic honesty. Am J Pharm Educ. 2009;6:23–37. doi: 10.5688/aj7306105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Mirdehghan M. Plagiarism; prevention and education in research structure. Engineering Culture Monthly [persian] 2010;33-34:10–7. [Google Scholar]
- 10.John B. Buckingham: OECD, SRHE and Open University Press; 2000. Managing quality in higher education, an international perspective on institutional assessment and change; pp. 20–4. [Google Scholar]
- 11.Evers K. Colorado: International Council for Science; 2000. Formulating international ethics responsibility and ethics in science. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Chicago: Chicago: 2006. CSEP, Perspectives on the professions, Chicago, Illinois institute of technology, center for the study of ethics in the professions. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ferasatkhah M. Scientific ethics, promotion codes of high educational: Professional ethics in quality of higher education in Iran. Ethics in Science and Technology [persian] 2007;1:13–25. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kenny D. Student plagiarism and professional practice. Nurse Educ Today. 2007;27:14–8. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.02.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Sterberg N. Yazd: University of Yazd; 2006. Methods of qualitative research in social science. [Google Scholar]
- 16.Wood MJ. The ethics of writing for publication. Clin Nurs Res. 2009;18:3–5. doi: 10.1177/1054773808330494. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Roberts TS. Australia: Central Queensland University; 2007. Student plagiarism in an online world: Problems and solutions Idea group reference. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Bouville M. Plagiarism: Words and ideas. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008;14:311–22. doi: 10.1007/s11948-008-9057-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Chun-Hua S. New York: Springer Science; 2006. Academic and dishonesty in higher education a nation wide study in Taiwan. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Pimple KD. Domains of research ethics: A heuristic frame work for the responsible conduct of research. Sci Eng Ethics. 2002;8:191–205. doi: 10.1007/s11948-002-0018-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]