JEBP

  • About
  • Journal’s Board
  • Instructions to Authors
  • Subscriptions
  • Electronic Submission

THE DEBATE ON SELF-PLAGIARISM: INQUISITIONAL SCIENCE OR HIGH STANDARDS OF SCHOLARSHIP?

Miguel ROIG
St. John’s University, New-York, USA

Abstract

Reusing one’s previously published work without alerting the reader of its prior publication constitutes self-plagiarism and it is a practice that is strictly forbidden by most scientific and scholarly journals. There are circumstances that may justify the publication of an entire article or of portions of an article that had been previously published in another journal. Guidance on these matters is readily available and specifies the conditions under which secondary publication can take place. However, the mission of most scholarly journals is to publish original research. With some exceptions (e.g., translation into another language), few journals seem willing to grant the right to publish their material elsewhere or exercise the option to publish an article that had been previously published in another periodical. One area of contention for which little guidance is available is the practice of reusing verbatim portions of text from authors’ previously published articles. I argue that such a practice should be avoided because it is not consistent with the high standards expected of scholars and scientists.

Keywords: self-plagiarism, ethics in research

Pages: 245-258

Jan 10, 2010admin

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)

Related

SCIENTISTS AS SCHRODINGER’S CAT: REPLAY TO ROIG’S “THE DEBATE ON SELF-PLAGIARISM: INQUISITIONAL SCIENCE OR HIGH STANDARDS OF SCHOLARSHIP?” THE “GHOST” CONCEPTS OF PSYCHOLOGY
Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies

Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies

Categories
  • About (8)
  • Vol XVII, No. 2, 2017 (10)
  • Vol XVII, No. 1, 2017 (9)
  • Vol XVI, Special Issue 1, 2016 (9)
  • Vol XV, No. 2, 2015 (9)
  • Vol XV, No. 1, 2015 (12)
  • Vol XIV, No. 2, 2014 (13)
  • Vol XIV, No. 1, 2014 (7)
  • Vol XIII, No. 2, 2013 (13)
  • Vol XIII, Special Issue 2a, 2013 (11)
  • Vol XIII, Special Issue 1a, 2013 (7)
  • Vol XIII, No. 1, 2013 (8)
  • Vol XII, No. 2, 2012 (8)
  • Vol XII, No. 1, 2012 (9)
  • Vol XI, No. 2, 2011 (11)
  • Vol XI, No. 1, 2011 (8)
  • Vol X, No. 1, 2010 (9)
  • Vol IX, No. 2, 2009 (8)
  • Vol IX, No. 1, 2009 (9)
  • Vol VIII, No. 2, 2008 (11)
  • Vol VIII, No. 1, 2008 (9)
  • Vol VII, No. 2, 2007 (5)
  • Vol VII, No. 1, 2007 (7)
  • Vol VI, No. 2, 2006 (9)
  • Vol VI, No. 1, 2006 (8)
  • Vol V, No. 2, 2005 (7)
  • Vol V, No. 1, 2005 (6)
  • Vol IV, No. 2, 2004 (3)
Keywords
irrational beliefsrebtcognitive-behavioral therapycbtEditorialdistressappraisalbinary model of distresscognitive restructuringschemasconversion disorderautism spectrum disorderspositive illusionshypnosisautismincompatible information techniquethe Attitudes and Belief Scale 2communicationrational emotive behavior theoryrational anticipation techniquedeficitstoddlersdevelopmentneural structurestheory of mindcognitive psychologyearly interventionwithdrawal motivational systemsattributionsfunctional and dysfunctional negative emotionsunitary model of distressmind reading beliefsirrational and rational beliefstreatmenteating behavioursmental healtharousalpre-goal/ post-goal attainment positive emotionsfunctional and dysfunctional emotionscore relational themesapproach motivational systemsdemandingnessdysfunctional consequencesdysfunctional positive emotionspreferences
Footer Sidebar 1

Drop a widget on "Footer Sidebar 1" sidebar at Appearance > Widgets page.

Footer Sidebar 2

Drop a widget on "Footer Sidebar 2" sidebar at Appearance > Widgets page.

2017 © Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies