Sir John Hill (1714-1775) and "His" Classification of Fishes: An Example of Eighteenth-Century Plagiarism.

John Hill (1714-1775), a brilliant man of many talents, was extremely productive, having produced more than a hundred books and pamphlets on a wide range of subjects, but despised by most contemporaries for his egotistical, argumentative, and provocative manner and for his slanderous writings that resulted in many heated disputes, among scientists and literati alike. Rejected in his attempts to join the Royal Society of London, he began a campaign of criticism and derision against the Society, its president, Martin Folkes (1690-1754), and the Philosophical Transactions, by publishing, under a pseudonym, satires on the Society that destroyed his chances of ever being elected to that body. Accusations of plagiarism followed much of his work. A previously unnoticed example of his wholesale lifting of the classification of fishes published in 1738 by Swedish naturalist Peter Artedi (1705-1735), is described. As for the Royal Society, Hill's persistent satirization, which was mixed with sound critical advice, is said to have done more to improve the quality of the Philosophical Transactions than any other contemporary effort.

Transparency in conducting and reporting research: A survey of authors, reviewers, and editors across scholarly disciplines.

Calls have been made for improving transparency in conducting and reporting research, improving work climates, and preventing detrimental research practices. To assess attitudes and practices regarding these topics, we sent a survey to authors, reviewers, and editors. We received 3,659 (4.9%) responses out of 74,749 delivered emails. We found no significant differences between authors', reviewers', and editors' attitudes towards transparency in conducting and reporting research, or towards their perceptions of work climates. Undeserved authorship was perceived by all groups as the most prevalent detrimental research practice, while fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and not citing prior relevant research, were seen as more prevalent by editors than authors or reviewers. Overall, 20% of respondents admitted sacrificing the quality of their publications for quantity, and 14% reported that funders interfered in their study design or reporting. While survey respondents came from 126 different countries, due to the survey's overall low response rate our results might not necessarily be generalizable. Nevertheless, results indicate that greater involvement of all stakeholders is needed to align actual practices with current recommendations.

The Cultural Context of Plagiarism and Research Misconduct in the Asian Region.

Plagiarism is one of the most frequent forms of research misconduct in South and East Asian countries. This narrative review examines the factors contributing to research misconduct, emphasizing plagiarism, particularly in South, East and Southeast Asian countries. We conducted a PubMed and Scopus search using the terms plagiarism, Asia, South Asia, East Asia, Southeast Asia, research misconduct and retractions in January of 2022. Articles with missing abstracts, incomplete information about plagiarism, publication dates before 2010, and those unrelated to South, East, and Southeast Asian countries were excluded. The retraction watch database was searched for articles retracted between 9th January 2020 to 9th January 2022. A total of 159 articles were identified, of which 21 were included in the study using the database search criteria mentioned above. The review of articles identified a lack of training in scientific writing and research ethics, publication pressure, permissive attitudes, and inadequate regulatory measures as the primary reasons behind research misconduct in scientific publications. Plagiarism remains a common cause of unethical publications and retractions in regions of Asia (namely South, East and Southeast). Researchers lack training in scientific writing, and substantial gaps exist in understanding various forms of plagiarism, which heavily contribute to the problem. There is an urgent need to foster high research ethics standards and adhere to journal policies. Providing appropriate training in scientific writing among researchers may help improve the knowledge of different types of plagiarism and promote the use of antiplagiarism software, leading to a substantial reduction in the problem.

Like Riding a Roller Coaster: University Teachers' Emotional Experiences Dealing with Student Plagiarism.

The topic of research ethics has attracted attention in Chinese higher education, especially with regard to the "crackdown" on plagiarism. Although higher education teachers have implemented various interventions intended to reduce such misconduct, academic malpractice continues to occur. However, few studies have investigated the emotional challenges that these teachers face when dealing with plagiarism and the emotional changes that they experience in the process of addressing such misconduct. To address this research gap, in the current study, interviews, focus group discussions, and teaching journals were employed to investigate the negative emotional experiences of university teachers with student plagiarism in the Chinese context. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted, followed by in-depth analyses. The findings highlighted the fluctuating emotional development of the participating teachers from an ecological perspective, and the influential factors associated with the mitigation of negative emotions for teachers facing challenging situations were examined. The results also highlighted the necessity of taking the initiative to strengthen and normalize academic integrity in tertiary institutions.

[Fake paper factories: root cause solutions are needed.] / Gli articoli scientifici fabbricati: servono soluzioni di sistema.

The pressure to publish academic papers for career advancement and technological innovations have fostered the growth of a new phenomenon, the serial fabrication of articles to be submitted to scientific journals. Papers with fake content are produced by specialised publishing agencies. Journal editors and publishers increased vigilance and control, tightening the peer review process and using anti-plagiarism software. But, being a systemic issue, it is not easy to find the solution and action must be taken on its causes: greater awareness of research ethics is needed, specific training for young doctors and - in the long run - an appropriate use of artificial intelligence, which should become a tool for protecting the integrity of knowledge.

Effect of medical researchers' creative performance on scientific misconduct: a moral psychology perspective.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, some researchers have engaged in scientific misconduct such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism to achieve higher research performance. Considering their detrimental effects on individuals' health status (e.g., patients, etc.) and extensive financial costs levied upon healthcare systems, such wrongdoings have even more salience in medical sciences. However, there has been little discussion on the possible influence of medical researchers' existing creative performance on scientific misconduct, and the moral psychological mechanisms underlying those effects are still poorly understood. METHODS: We build a moderated mediation model to test how medical researchers' creative performance affects their scientific misconduct and explore the role of moral licensing and moral identity in this process. Based on situational experiments and projection techniques, 287 medical researchers in China participated in a survey. RESULTS: Medical researchers' creative performance positively relates to scientific misconduct, and moral licensing plays a mediating role in the relationship between them. In addition, moral identity has a negative moderating effect on the mediating effect of moral licensing on creative performance and scientific misconduct. CONCLUSION: Moral licensing plays a fully mediating role in the relationship between creative performance and scientific misconduct. And moral identity negatively moderates the indirect effect of creative performance on scientific misconduct through moral licensing. The findings provide theoretical and practical implications for the prevention of medical researchers' scientific misconduct.

Exploring the Attitudes of Pharmacy Students in Saudi Arabia towards Plagiarism Evidence from a Cross-Sectional Study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to explore the attitudes towards plagiarism among pharmacy students in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on pharmacy students at King Saud University in Riyadh to assess their attitudes towards plagiarism. The questionnaire consists of 27 items on a 5-point Likert scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, and strongly agree) that assess three attitudes about plagiarism (positive and negative attitudes, as well as subjective norms). RESULTS: A total of 415 pharmacy students took part in this research. Among the whole sample, 55.7% were male, and 44.3% were female. The findings demonstrated a moderately positive attitude towards plagiarism (30 ± 6) and subjective standards (29 ± 7) as well as a moderate negative attitude (22 ± 5). About 26.5% of students did not believe that they worked in a plagiarism-free workplace, and 45.3% of students believed that self-plagiarism should not be punished in the same way as plagiarism. CONCLUSIONS: The overall attitudes of pharmacy students were positive. Training in medical writing and research ethics in the undergraduate and graduate pharmacy curricula is mandatory.

Academic integrity among medical students and postgraduate trainees in the teaching hospitals of South Punjab Pakistan.

This study investigated the topic of the academic integrity among medical students and postgraduate trainees in the teaching hospitals of South Punjab, Pakistan. A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 318 medical students and postgraduate trainees of teaching hospitals. The results found that medical students of pre-clinical years engaged in unethical behaviour, that is, exam cheating and plagiarism to cope with internal and external evaluation and the range of subjects needed to be studied. For postgraduate trainees, results showed trainees unintentionally engaged in the practice of plagiarism due to lack of understanding about what constitutes plagiarism, coupled with externally perceived pressures associated with expectations of research publication, promotions and tenured positions. To address these concerns, it is recommended that information literacy sessions for undergraduate and postgraduate medical students on plagiarism prevention and ethical practice be designed and facilitated by medical librarians in collaboration of faculty members.

Contract Cheating and Ghostwriting among University Students in Health Specialties.

Contract cheating and ghostwriting are forms of misconduct that are unethical and a serious academic issue, especially among healthcare professionals, as they directly impact patient health. To date, research on this area in the Middle East has been limited. Therefore, we used a validated self-administered questionnaire to investigate the awareness, perceptions, and reasons for these behaviors among 682 students in health specialties at five universities in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The majority of the students (60.1%) were unaware of the terms "contract cheating" and "ghostwriting," and 69.5% had not received any prior training on integrity. However, having prior training had a positive effect on awareness levels, and respondents attending private universities were significantly more aware than those attending public universities. The factors that contributed to contract cheating behavior included poor time management, English language difficulties, and a lack of writing skills. These findings emphasize the need for integrity training at the national level to raise awareness.

Do biomedical researchers differ in their perceptions of plagiarism across Europe? Findings from an online survey among leading universities.

BACKGROUND: Existing research on perceptions of plagiarism and cultural influences mainly focuses on comparisons between the Western World and the Eastern World. However, possible differences within the Western World have hardly been assessed, especially among biomedical academics. The authors compared perceptions of plagiarism among European biomedical researchers who participated in an online survey. METHODS: The present work is based on the data collected in a previous online survey done in 2018 among biomedical researchers working in leading European and Chinese universities. Respondents based in Europe were grouped into three geographical regions (northern Europe, southern Europe and northwestern Europe) and their responses were analyzed using logistic regression analysis with adjustments for demographic factors. RESULTS: Data were available from 810 respondents (265 northern Europe, 101 southern Europe, 444 northwestern Europe). In addition to their generally similar responses, different perceptions of plagiarism were observed among respondents in the three European regions. In summary, among the three European regions, Nordic respondents identified the most types of practices as plagiarism. Compared to the southern respondents, Nordic and northwestern respondents were more likely to consider less evident practices as plagiarism, such as Rephrasing another person's work without crediting the source [aORN|S 1.99 (95%CI 1.08;3.67), aORS|NW 0.50 (95%CI 0.28;0.91)] and With permission from the original author, using another's text without crediting the source [aORN|S 3.16 (95%CI 1.90;5.25), aORS|NW 0.26 (95%CI 0.16;0.42)]. In contrast, the southern respondents were the most inclined to recognize recycling of one's previously rejected research proposal as plagiarism. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of a generally similar response pattern, the present study indicates different perceptions of plagiarism among European biomedical researchers. These intra-European differences should be considered when addressing plagiarism.

Evaluation of retracted publications in Dentistry: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The objective of retracting flawed publications is to maintain the integrity of scientific literature. Retractions in the dental literature have been on the rise in recent years. Hence, we aimed to review retracted articles related to dentistry. METHODS: A search was conducted of the MEDLINE database for retracted articles in the dental literature published between April 1, 1993 and March 31, 2020. The retracted articles and the notices of retraction were reviewed, and the findings are presented. RESULTS: During the selected period, 143 articles were retracted. Redundant publication (n=50, 35%) was the most common reason for retraction, followed by plagiarism (n=43, 30.1%) and data manipulation (n=42, 29.4%). Around 70.6% (n=101) of retracted articles were original articles. Eight (5.6%) of the articles were single authored. The retracted articles have been cited by about 1300 publications, after the date of publication of the retraction notice. The gap between publication and retraction was longer for funded articles than for non-funded articles, and for articles retracted for data manipulation than for articles retracted for other types of misconduct. Twenty-one journals and nine authors retracted two or more papers. The majority of authors of retracted articles (224, 37%) were from India. CONCLUSION: Our study showed that the retraction of publications due to misconduct such as duplicate publication, plagiarism, data manipulation is a matter of concern and calls for strict measures to curb the menace of research misconduct.

Analysis of Retracted Publications in The Biomedical Literature from Turkey.

BACKGROUND: Retraction is a process for correcting the literature and provides a barrier to the dissemination of publications that include major faults or false-misleading data. The aim of this study was to examine the characteristics of retracted articles in the biomedical field sourced from Turkey. METHODS: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, all retracted publications from Turkey on PubMed were listed without date restriction. Data covering the article title, authors, publication date, retraction date, time between publication and retraction dates (in months), journal, article type, country of the corresponding author, peer review timeline (in days), reason for retraction, and subject area of the retracted item were recorded. Citation data were obtained using the Scopus database. The altmetric attention scores of the articles were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 102 articles were listed and after the implementation of exclusion criteria, 86 articles were included for analysis. The first retracted article was published in 2000 (n = 1), while the most retracted articles were published in 2020 (n = 11). The median time lag between publication and retraction was 10.33 (0.73-144.06) months. The main factors causing retraction were plagiarism (n = 23), duplication (n = 22) and error (n = 17). The total number of citations was 695. A total of 224 citations were in the pre-retraction period and 471 citations were in the post-retraction period. CONCLUSION: The retracted article counts showed a rising trend over the years. The leading causes of retraction for articles from Turkey were plagiarism, duplication, and error. It was found that the articles continued to be cited after the retraction. Researchers in Turkey should be educated on retraction, particularly plagiarism and duplication. Strategies should be developed to prevent articles from being cited after retraction.

Threats to scholarly research integrity arising from paper mills: a rapid scoping review.

"Paper mills" are unethical outsourcing agencies proficient in fabricating fraudulent manuscripts submitted to scholarly journals. In earlier years, the activity of such companies involved plagiarism, but their processes have gained complexity, involving the fabrication of images and fake results. The objective of this study is to examine the main features of retracted paper mills' articles registered in the Retraction Watch database, from inception to the present, analyzing the number of articles per year, their number of citations, and their authorship network. Eligibility criteria for inclusion: retracted articles in any language due to paper mill activity. Retraction letters, notes, and notices, for exclusion. We collected the associated citations and the journals' impact factors of the retracted papers from Web of Science (Clarivate) and performed a data network analysis using VOSviewer software. This scoping review complies with PRISMA 2020 statement and main extensions. After a thorough analysis of the data, we identified 325 retracted articles due to suspected operations published in 31 journals (with a mean impact factor of 3.1). These retractions have produced 3708 citations. Nearly all retracted papers have come from China. Journal's impact factor lower than 7, life sciences journals, cancer, and molecular biology topics were common among retracted studies. The rapid increase of retractions is highly challenging. Paper mills damage scientific research integrity, exacerbating fraud, plagiarism, fake images, and simulated results. Rheumatologists should be fully aware of this growing phenomenon.

Extent of knowledge and attitudes on plagiarism among undergraduate medical students in South India - a multicentre, cross-sectional study to determine the need for incorporating research ethics in medical undergraduate curriculum.

BACKGROUND: Undergraduate medical students in India participate in various research activities However, plagiarism is rampant, and we hypothesize that it is the lack of knowledge on how to avoid plagiarism. This study's objective was to measure the extent of knowledge and attitudes towards plagiarism among undergraduate medical students in India. METHODS: It was a multicentre, cross-sectional study conducted over a two-year period (January 2018 - December 2019). Undergraduate medical students were given a pre-tested semi-structured questionnaire which contained: (a) Demographic details; (b) A quiz developed by Indiana University, USA to assess knowledge; and (c) Attitudes towards Plagiarism (ATP) questionnaire. RESULTS: Eleven medical colleges (n = 4 government medical colleges [GMCs] and n = 7 private medical colleges [PMCs]) participated. A total of N = 4183 students consented. The mean (SD) knowledge score was 4.54 (1.78) out of 10. The factors (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]; 95% Confidence interval [CI]; p value) that emerged as significant predictors of poor knowledge score were early years of medical education (0.110; 0.063, 0.156; < 0.001) and being enrolled in a GMC (0.348; 0.233, 0.463; < 0.001).The overall mean (SD) scores of the three attitude components namely permissive, critical and submissive norms were 37.56 (5.25), 20.35 (4.20) and 31.20 (4.28) respectively, corresponding to the moderate category. CONCLUSION: The overall knowledge score was poor. A vast majority of study participants fell in the moderate category of attitude score. These findings warrant the need for incorporating formal training in the medical education curriculum.