Plagiarism: Words and Ideas

Plagiarism is a crime against academy. It deceives readers, hurts plagiarized authors, and gets the plagiarist undeserved benefits. However, even though these arguments do show that copying other people's intellectual contribution is wrong, they do not apply to the copying of words. Copying a few sentences that contain no original idea (e.g. in the introduction) is of marginal importance compared to stealing the ideas of others. The two must be clearly distinguished, and the 'plagiarism' label should not be used for deeds which are very different in nature and importance.     

Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception

Nominal concepts represent things as tokens of types. We report six experiments that investigate the nature of the relations we represent between the type of thing something is (e.g. DOG) and its other properties. The experiments provide evidence that we represent principled connections between the type of thing something is (e.g. DOG) and some of its properties (k-properties; e.g. having four legs for dogs), but not other properties (t-properties; e.g. being brown for dogs). Principled connections are different from logical, statistical, and causal connections. Principled connections, (i) license the expectation that tokens of the type will generally possess the k-property, (ii) license explanation of the presence of k-properties in tokens of a type by reference to the type of thing it is, and (iii) license normative expectations concerning the presence of the k-property in tokens of the type. The experiments provide evidence for all three of these aspects of principled connections. The experiments also demonstrate that principled connections must be distinguished from merely strong statistical connections. We suggest that principled connections are one of the fundamental types of relations (in addition to logical, statistical, and causal relations) in terms of which our conceptual knowledge is structured. We argue that principled connections reveal a formal mode of understanding and explanation. This mode of understanding complements other modes of understanding that have been studied within the theory-based approach to conceptual representation. Finally, we suggest that kind representations are distinguished from representations of mere types by the representation of principled connections to k-properties.     

Permissible Use and Interdependence: Against Principled Veganism

Are animals not ours to use? According to proponents of veganism such as Gary Francione, any and all use of animals by humans is exploitative and wrong. It is wrong because animals have intrinsic worth and humans' use of animals fails to respect that worth. Contra Francione, I argue that that there are conditions under which it may be morally appropriate to collect, consume, sell, or otherwise use animal products. Francione is mistaken in his belief that assigning intrinsic worth to a being is impossible if said being is also conceived as a resource. Using and (non‐instrumental) valuing are not mutually exclusive; if they were, many if not most human relationships would be deemed morally unacceptable. Through a series of thought experiments involving intra‐human relationships, I suggest that moral condemnation of relationships within which a less dependent party regularly takes from a more dependent party is indefensible. In fact, relationships of use between asymmetrically dependent parties are essential to the functioning of cooperative society, and are therefore desirable. My aims with this article are to convince readers of the need to reject principled veganism, and to garner support for new philosophical accounts of morally appropriate human‐nonhuman animal relationships.     

Accountability Reduces Unconscious Plagiarism

We investigated how holding participants accountable for their responses affected unconscious plagiarism when solving a Boggle puzzle task (finding words in a 4 × 4 letter matrix). Both experimental and control participants (N = 60) generated puzzle solutions with a computer partner, recalled their own previously generated solutions, and then produced new solutions to the puzzles. Accountability was manipulated by telling participants in the experimental group before beginning the initial‐generation phase that at the end of the session, they would review their generated responses with the researcher (accountable participants). Accountable participants plagiarized less than control participants when generating words with the computer and generating new solutions on their own but not when they were attempting to recall words they initially generated. The data are discussed in terms of the leading theoretical explanation of unconscious plagiarism, the source‐monitoring framework. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Plagiarism as a Social Contract,a New Way to Approach Plagiarism

Journal of Academic Ethics - Most cases of plagiarism involve a power differential where not every person has the same ability to enter into a social contract. A social contract requires that each...     

Perceptions of and Attitudes toward Plagiarism and Factors Contributing to Plagiarism: a Review of Studies

The abundance of information technology and electronic resources for academic materials has contributed to the attention given to research on plagiarism from various perspectives. Among the issues that have attracted researchers’ attention are perceptions of plagiarism and attitudes toward plagiarism. This article presents a critical review of studies that have been conducted to examine staff’s and students’ perceptions of and attitudes toward plagiarism. It also presents a review of studies that have focused on factors contributing to plagiarism. Our review of studies reveals that most of the studies on perceptions of plagiarism and attitudes toward plagiarism lack an in-depth analysis of the relationship between the perceptions of plagiarism and other contextual, sociocultural and institutional variables, or the relationship between attitudes toward plagiarism and students’ perceptions of various forms of plagiarism. Although our review shows that various factors can contribute to plagiarism, there is no taxonomy that can account for all these factors. Some suggestions for future research are provided in this review article.     

Advice for Plagiarism Whistleblowers

Scholarly open-access publishing has made it easier for researchers to discover and report academic misconduct such as plagiarism. However, as the website Retraction Watch shows, plagiarism is by no means limited to open-access journals. Moreover, various web-based services provide plagiarism detection software, facilitating one’s ability to detect pirated content. Upon discovering plagiarism, some are compelled to report it, but being a plagiarism whistleblower is inherently stressful and can leave one vulnerable to criticism and retaliation by colleagues and others (Anderson, 1993; Cabral-Cardoso, 2004). Reporting plagiarism can also draw the threat of legal action. This article draws upon our experiences as plagiarism whistleblowers with several goals in mind: to help would-be whistleblowers be better prepared for making well-founded allegations, to give whistleblowers some idea of what they can expect when reporting plagiarism, and to give suggestions for reducing whistleblowers’ vulnerability to threats and stress.     

普世伦理对话的原则构想

如今 ,越来越多的人们发现 ,经济与文化全球化的不断延展、泛化 ,一方面使世界各国的相互依赖性增强 ,另一方面也使跨文化与跨国界交往问题趋于复杂。其中所面临的种种挑战 ,势必也反映到伦理价值层面。因此 ,发轫于上世纪末期的普世伦理 (ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓａｌｅｔｈｉｃｓ)问题 ,在新世纪日益凸现出来。由全球化所引发的伦理价值问题 ,主要集中在四个领域 ,即人类与自然的协调关系、人的权利与责任、个体与社团的互补关系、和平与公正的平衡发展。这其中所包含的可能福祉与实际问题 ,都带有全球性的某种特征 ,或者说具有一定的普遍性。作为…     

Welfare,Autonomy, and the Autonomy Fallacy

In this article, I subject the claim that autonomous choice is an intrinsic welfare benefit to critical scrutiny. My argument begins by discussing perhaps the most influential argument in favor of the intrinsic value of autonomy: the argument from deference. In response, I hold that this argument displays what I call the ‘Autonomy Fallacy’: the argument from deference has no power to support the intrinsic value of autonomy in comparison to the important evaluative significance of bare self‐direction (autonomous or not) or what I call ‘self‐direction tout court’. I defend the claim that the Autonomy Fallacy really is a fallacy, and show that my examination of the argument from deference has wider reverberations. Once we clearly distinguish between autonomy and self‐direction tout court, it becomes much less plausible to say that autonomy of itself is an intrinsic welfare benefit.     

Unpredictable yet Guided: Arendt on Principled Action

Political action is unpredictable because it unfolds among a plurality of independent actors. This unpredictability generates a fundamental puzzle: If an actor cannot know where her initiative will lead, what motivates and guides her in her doings? The aim of this paper is to develop and defend the solution to the puzzle that we can find in the thought of Hannah Arendt, namely the idea that political action is – or should be – motivated and guided by principles, principles like justice, equality, or honour. Such principles must be distinguished from goals because they do not designate a specific state of affairs, but are general ideas that allow for diverse implementations. I show that this distinction is of great practical importance for the actors involved, since their outlook and their attitude towards others will differ depending on whether they see their activity as aimed at a goal or as guided by a principle.     

Plagiarism and Paraphrasing Criteria of College and University Professors

In Study 1, college professors determined whether each of 6 rewritten versions of a paragraph taken from a journal article were instances of plagiarism. Results indicated moderate disagreement as to which rewritten versions had been plagiarized. When another sample of professors (Study 2) was asked to paraphrase the same paragraph, up to 30% appropriated some text from the original. In Study 3, psychology professors paraphrased the same paragraph or a comparable one that was easier to read. Twenty-six percent of the psychologists appropriated text from the original version, whereas only 3% appropriated text from the one that was easier to read. The results of these studies are discussed in the context of existing definitions of paraphrasing and plagiarism.     

The Instructional Challenges of Student Plagiarism

The focus of this article is university teachers’ and students’ views of plagiarism, plagiarism detection, and the use of plagiarism detection software as learning support. The data were collected from teachers and students who participated in a pilot project to test plagiarism detection software at a major university in Finland. The data were analysed through factor analysis, T-tests and inductive content analysis. Three distinct reasons for plagiarism were identified: intentional, unintentional and contextual. The teachers did not utilise plagiarism detection to support student learning to any great extent. We discuss the pedagogical implications and suggest that the contextual reasons for plagiarism require focus primarily on study strategies, whereas the intentional reasons require profound discussion about attitudes and conceptions of good learning and university-level study habits.     

Autonomy and Akrasia

Abstract

Strict akratic actions, by definition, are performed freely. However, agents may seem not to be selfgoverned with respect to such actions and therefore not to perform them autonomously. If appearance matches reality here, freedom and autonomy part company in this sphere. Do they? That is this article's guiding question. To make things manageable, it is assumed that there are free actions, including strict akratic actions. Two theses are defended. First, the combination of (i) an intentional action's being uncompelled and (ii) its being - or executing - in appropriate informational circumstances, a sane decision that, as the agent recognizes, is for a course of action that she believes to be inferior to an alternative course of action open to her is sufficient for the action's being freely performed. (Condition (i) provides elbow room allegedly needed for free action, and (ii) encompasses freedom-level psychological sophistication.) Second, the same combination is sufficient for an intentional action's being autonomously performed.     

Autonomy and Nondefensiveness

Three experimental studies tested whether a priming procedure intended to activate an autonomy orientation would lead to nondefensiveness and enhanced performance, whether activated control orientation would lead to higher defense and impaired performance, and whether activated impersonal orientation would lead to the greatest defense and worst performance. Study 1 showed that autonomy-primed participants report lower desire for escape compared to control-primed, and that impersonally-primed showed most desire to escape. In Study 2, autonomy-primed participants showed the least self-serving bias, control-primed were in the middle, and impersonally-primed participants showed the most. In Study 3, rowers autonomy-primed showed the least self-handicapping and best performance, control-primed showed moderate levels, and impersonally-primed showed the most self-handicapping and worst performance. Results are discussed in terms of motivation orientation, defensiveness, and performance.

Evidence-Responsiveness and Autonomy

It is plausible to think that part of what it is to be an autonomous agent is to adequately respond to important changes in one’s circumstances. The agent who has set her own course in life, but is unable to recognize and respond appropriately when evidence arises indicating the need to reconsider and perhaps adjust her plan, lacks an important form of personal autonomy. However, this “evidence-responsiveness” aspect of autonomy has not yet been adequately analyzed. Most autonomy theorists ignore it altogether and the few who have addressed it have failed to give a satisfactory account. In this paper, I first examine an evidence-responsiveness condition proposed by Arneson. I argue there that while Arneson’s condition provides a valuable framework in which to examine evidence-responsiveness, there are several crucial issues that it either fails to address at all or else fails to adequately resolve. That condition is therefore in need of further elaboration and refinement. I then examine a recent article in this journal by Blöser, Schöpf, and Willaschek which develops an account of autonomy that I argue can usefully be understood as employing and elaborating upon the general framework offered by Arneson. I argue that while the elaboration Blöser and her co-authors provide Arneson’s condition is instructive, it is inadequate in several important ways which indicate the form a more satisfactory evidence-responsiveness condition will take. I go on to develop such a condition and conclude by highlighting the advantages to be gained by including that condition in a complete theory of autonomy.     

On Principles of Educational Change and Principled Action in Psychotherapy Supervision

Change strategies/principles, a well-recognized and accepted component of therapeutic practice, have yet to be comparably considered in psychotherapy supervision. Can there be educational change strategies/principles for psychotherapy supervision? I take up that question subsequently. I contend that supervision is forever a principle-driven activity, that supervisors practice in a principle-driven manner, and that a common core of guiding supervision strategies/principles can be identified. Reasoning by analogy from the seminal works of Goldfried (Am Psychol 35:991–999, 1980; How people change: inside and outside therapy, Springer, New York, 1991; Clin Psychol Rev 33, 862–869, 2013) and Castonguay and Beutler (Principles of therapeutic change that work, Oxford University Press, New York, 2006a; J Clin Psychol 62:631–638, 2006b; Principles of therapeutic change that work, Oxford University Press, New York, 2006c), I propose one such common core: 20 educational strategies/principles that cut across any and all forms of supervision. What follows is foremost a stimulus paper, a starting point, designed to provoke further dialogue about this crucial but unconsidered aspect of supervision practice.     

Intimacy and Autonomy

No abstract available for this article.