ArticleScience and engineering ethics2008
Is there an effective approach to deterring students from plagiarizing?
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Plagiarism as Reported by Participants Completing the AuthorAID MOOC on Research Writing.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Attitudes and Knowledge About Plagiarism Among University Students: Cross-Sectional Survey at the University of Split, Croatia.Science and engineering ethics · 2019Article
- Research Misconduct in the Croatian Scientific Community: A Survey Assessing the Forms and Characteristics of Research Misconduct.Science and engineering ethics · 2017Article
- Pharmacy students' interpretation of academic integrity.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2014Article
- Prevalence of plagiarism in recent submissions to the Croatian Medical Journal.Science and engineering ethics · 2012Article
- Competing duties: medical educators, underperforming students, and social accountability.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2012Article
- Plagiarism detection--quality management tool for all scientific journals.Croatian medical journal · 2012Article
- Ethical considerations in scientific writing.Indian journal of sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS · 2011Article
- Revisiting Information Technology tools serving authorship and editorship: a case-guided tutorial to statistical analysis and plagiarism detection.Hippokratia · 2010Article
- Medical researchers in non-English countries and concerns about unintentional plagiarism.Journal of medical ethics and history of medicine · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of plagiarism detection software and penalty for plagiarizing in detecting and deterring plagiarism among medical students. The study was a continuation of previously published research in which second-year medical students from 2001/2002 and 2002/2003 school years were required to write an essay based on one of the four scientific articles offered by the instructor. Students from 2004/2005 (N = 92) included in present study were given the same task. Topics of two of the four articles were considered less complex, and two were more complex. One less and one more complex articles were available only as hardcopies, whereas the other two were available in electronic format. The students from 2001/2002 (N = 111) were only told to write an original essay, whereas the students from 2002/2003 (N = 87) were additionally warned against plagiarism, explained what plagiarism was, and how to avoid it. The students from 2004/2005 were warned that their essays would be examined by plagiarism detection software and that those who had plagiarized would be penalized. Students from 2004/2005 plagiarized significantly less of their essays than students from the previous two groups (2% vs. 17% vs. 21%, respectively, P < 0.001). Over time, students more frequently choose articles with more complex subjects (P < 0.001) and articles in electronic format (P < 0.001) as a source for their essays, but it did not influence the rate of plagiarism. Use of plagiarism detection software in evaluation of essays and consequent penalties had effectively deterred students from plagiarizing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.