ArticleScientific reports2026
Plagiarism awareness in post-graduate students: case study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Plagiarism in academic contexts presents a substantial ethical challenge within the field of publishing, impacting a diverse array of individuals, including faculty members and students. The present study employs a descriptive approach and was conducted using a survey method. The research sample consisted of 291 post-graduate students, selected through a stratified random sampling technique. The research instrument was a questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using an independent samples t-test, and correlation coefficients. The collected data were analyzed using independent samples t-test, ANOVA, and correlation coefficients within the SPSS software environment (version 26). The findings demonstrated that the overall average awareness of academic plagiarism is higher among male participants than female participants; however, this difference was not statistically significant. Additionally, the average awareness of academic plagiarism in PhD students was significantly higher than Master's students. The analysis revealed a significant difference in the average awareness of academic plagiarism among students from their first to fourth year, showing that awareness increased with each subsequent academic year. Furthermore, a positive and significant relationship was identified between the average awareness of academic plagiarism and academic level. The study revealed that as students progressed through their academic years, their awareness of the concepts and instances of academic plagiarism increased.
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.