Reuse in STEM Research Writing: Rhetorical and Practical Considerations and Challenges

Autor/inn/en	Anson, Chris M.; Hall, Susanne; Pemberton, Michael; Moskovitz, Cary
Titel	Reuse in STEM Research Writing: Rhetorical and Practical Considerations and Challenges
Quelle	In: AILA Review, 33 (2020) 1, S.120-135 (16 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1461-0213
Schlagwörter	Language Usage; Ethics; Plagiarism; Publishing Industry; Duplication; Grants; Editing; Computational Linguistics; Biological Sciences; Engineering; Mathematics; Physical Sciences; Economics; Social Sciences; Behavioral Sciences; Research Reports; Periodicals; Scientific Research; Accuracy; Decision Making; Copyrights; Authors + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Sprachgebrauch; Ethik; Plagiat; Grant; Finanzielle Beihilfe; Redaktion; Textbearbeitung; Linguistics; Computerlinguistik; Abwasserbiologie; Maschinenbau; Mathematik; Natural sciences; Naturwissenschaften; Naturwissenschaft; Volkswirtschaftslehre; Social science; Sozialwissenschaften; Gesellschaftswissenschaften; Research report; Forschungsbericht; Periodical; Journal; Zeitschrift; Fachzeitschrift; Periodikum; Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Author; Autor; Autorin
Abstract	Text recycling (hereafter TR), sometimes problematically called "self-plagiarism," involves the verbatim reuse of text from one's own existing documents in a newly created text -- such as the duplication of a paragraph or section from a published article in a new article. Although plagiarism is widely eschewed across academia and the publishing industry, the ethics of TR are not agreed upon and are currently being vigorously debated. As part of a federally funded (US) National Science Foundation grant, we have been studying TR patterns using several methodologies, including interviews with editors about TR values and practices (Pemberton, Hall, Moskovitz, & Anson, 2019) and digitally mediated text-analytic processes to determine the extent of TR in academic publications in the biological sciences, engineering, mathematical and physical sciences, and social, behavioral, and economic sciences (Anson, Moskovitz, & Anson, 2019). In this article, we first describe and illustrate TR in the context of academic writing. We then explain and document several themes that emerged from interviews with publishers of peer-reviewed academic journals. These themes demonstrate the vexed and unsettled nature of TR as a discursive phenomenon in academic writing and publishing. In doing so, we focus on the complex relationships between personal (role-based) and social (norm-based) aspects of scientific publication, complicating conventional models of the writing process that have inadequately accounted for authorial decisions about accuracy, efficiency, self-representation, adherence to existing or imagined rules and norms, perceptions of ownership and copyright, and fears of impropriety. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	John Benjamins Publishing Company. Klaprozenweg 105 Postbus 36224, NL-1020 ME Amsterdam, Netherlands. Tel: +31-20-6304747; Fax: +31-20-6739773; e-mail: subscription@benjamins.nl; Web site: https://www.benjamins.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01