Is “inadequate referencing” a euphemism for plagiarism?Are there any examples for an ArXiv publication nurturing or preventing plagiarism?How to preempt plagiarism accusationsHow to reconcile with an old mentor after (unintentional) plagiarism accusationsPlagiarism of Lecture SlidesHow to deal with past unintentional and unpunished plagiarism?I came across plagiarism. Whom should I inform if at all?What are examples of penalties for “self-plagiarism”?Does two lines of copied code constitute plagiarism?Got accused of plagiarism due to a reference lost during copying my own writingWhat should I do when a predatory conference will not listen to us and the journal might retract our paper?
What is 管理しきれず?
Print last inputted byte
Fair way to split coins
Does fire aspect on a sword, destroy mob drops?
Did Nintendo change its mind about 68000 SNES?
What are the rules for concealing thieves' tools (or items in general)?
How are passwords stolen from companies if they only store hashes?
Do I need an EFI partition for each 18.04 ubuntu I have on my HD?
PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?
Single word to change groups
Hot air balloons as primitive bombers
Exposing a company lying about themselves in a tightly knit industry: Is my career at risk on the long run?
Gauss brackets with double vertical lines
Symbolism of 18 Journeyers
The English Debate
Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions
Pre-Employment Background Check With Consent For Future Checks
Why I don't get the wanted width of tcbox?
Is xar preinstalled on macOS?
How can an organ that provides biological immortality be unable to regenerate?
Help with identifying unique aircraft over NE Pennsylvania
is this saw blade faulty?
Is there any common country to visit for uk and schengen visa?
Why is "la Gestapo" feminine?
Is “inadequate referencing” a euphemism for plagiarism?
Are there any examples for an ArXiv publication nurturing or preventing plagiarism?How to preempt plagiarism accusationsHow to reconcile with an old mentor after (unintentional) plagiarism accusationsPlagiarism of Lecture SlidesHow to deal with past unintentional and unpunished plagiarism?I came across plagiarism. Whom should I inform if at all?What are examples of penalties for “self-plagiarism”?Does two lines of copied code constitute plagiarism?Got accused of plagiarism due to a reference lost during copying my own writingWhat should I do when a predatory conference will not listen to us and the journal might retract our paper?
I am aware of a professor, who wrote two published books that had to be corrected. On the publisher's website it states that these two books had been corrected due to "inadequate referencing". Is inadequate referencing essentially a euphemism for plagiarism? Or is it possible that inadequate referencing can really be a lesser sort of offence?
plagiarism terminology
add a comment |
I am aware of a professor, who wrote two published books that had to be corrected. On the publisher's website it states that these two books had been corrected due to "inadequate referencing". Is inadequate referencing essentially a euphemism for plagiarism? Or is it possible that inadequate referencing can really be a lesser sort of offence?
plagiarism terminology
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I am aware of a professor, who wrote two published books that had to be corrected. On the publisher's website it states that these two books had been corrected due to "inadequate referencing". Is inadequate referencing essentially a euphemism for plagiarism? Or is it possible that inadequate referencing can really be a lesser sort of offence?
plagiarism terminology
I am aware of a professor, who wrote two published books that had to be corrected. On the publisher's website it states that these two books had been corrected due to "inadequate referencing". Is inadequate referencing essentially a euphemism for plagiarism? Or is it possible that inadequate referencing can really be a lesser sort of offence?
plagiarism terminology
plagiarism terminology
edited 8 hours ago
Wrzlprmft♦
34.3k10109185
34.3k10109185
asked 18 hours ago
user1778351user1778351
11425
11425
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago
add a comment |
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
I think that's a rather unkind interpretation of what happened here. Books aren't the same as research articles - especially for text books, it is par for the course that large swaths (most?) of the book are not actually about the author's own ideas.
Further, extremely detailed referencing can easily reduce the readability of the book, so oftentimes book authors are given a bit more leeway than what would be acceptable in a research article.
What I assumed happened here is that either some references are simply missing (as Solar Mike said), or that it has been later on determined that some parts of the book should really reference more explicitly where the respective content came from (either because the original author complained or because the book author decided that some more references would help a reader find additional information). I would not assume this to mean that the book author blatantly copied material from somewhere (this, presumably, would not lead to a correction but to withdrawing the entire book, because it also sounds like a copyright nightmare for the publisher).
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps the professor had included an incomplete bibliography in the first submitted version, so inline text references were there but not in the biblio...
Annoying for the professor, embarrassing possibly, but easily corrected, however, what it was I don't know.
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm guessing it's a euphemism for dubious content, rather than plagiarism.
While books should cite their sources, it is not necessary to cite every single fact. The book's author (who is an expert on the topic) will justify or prove most facts in the course of the discussion. It's good practice to include a bibliography showing relevant primary sources (e.g., for further reading); however, merely summarizing a published paper in a textbook does not necessarily require a citation (e.g., we do not cite Newton's papers in introductory physics books). Citations are really only needed when facts are asserted without being proven or justified through the narrative.
In this case, the word "inadequate" does make it seem that there was a problem. This could be a euphemism for plagiarism: word-for-word copying, or not meeting the publisher's standards in terms of referencing relevant work. Or, it could be that the author stated a lot of facts without justification or citation, and some of them turned out to be dubious or even wrong. That's my guess.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126629%2fis-inadequate-referencing-a-euphemism-for-plagiarism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I think that's a rather unkind interpretation of what happened here. Books aren't the same as research articles - especially for text books, it is par for the course that large swaths (most?) of the book are not actually about the author's own ideas.
Further, extremely detailed referencing can easily reduce the readability of the book, so oftentimes book authors are given a bit more leeway than what would be acceptable in a research article.
What I assumed happened here is that either some references are simply missing (as Solar Mike said), or that it has been later on determined that some parts of the book should really reference more explicitly where the respective content came from (either because the original author complained or because the book author decided that some more references would help a reader find additional information). I would not assume this to mean that the book author blatantly copied material from somewhere (this, presumably, would not lead to a correction but to withdrawing the entire book, because it also sounds like a copyright nightmare for the publisher).
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I think that's a rather unkind interpretation of what happened here. Books aren't the same as research articles - especially for text books, it is par for the course that large swaths (most?) of the book are not actually about the author's own ideas.
Further, extremely detailed referencing can easily reduce the readability of the book, so oftentimes book authors are given a bit more leeway than what would be acceptable in a research article.
What I assumed happened here is that either some references are simply missing (as Solar Mike said), or that it has been later on determined that some parts of the book should really reference more explicitly where the respective content came from (either because the original author complained or because the book author decided that some more references would help a reader find additional information). I would not assume this to mean that the book author blatantly copied material from somewhere (this, presumably, would not lead to a correction but to withdrawing the entire book, because it also sounds like a copyright nightmare for the publisher).
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I think that's a rather unkind interpretation of what happened here. Books aren't the same as research articles - especially for text books, it is par for the course that large swaths (most?) of the book are not actually about the author's own ideas.
Further, extremely detailed referencing can easily reduce the readability of the book, so oftentimes book authors are given a bit more leeway than what would be acceptable in a research article.
What I assumed happened here is that either some references are simply missing (as Solar Mike said), or that it has been later on determined that some parts of the book should really reference more explicitly where the respective content came from (either because the original author complained or because the book author decided that some more references would help a reader find additional information). I would not assume this to mean that the book author blatantly copied material from somewhere (this, presumably, would not lead to a correction but to withdrawing the entire book, because it also sounds like a copyright nightmare for the publisher).
I think that's a rather unkind interpretation of what happened here. Books aren't the same as research articles - especially for text books, it is par for the course that large swaths (most?) of the book are not actually about the author's own ideas.
Further, extremely detailed referencing can easily reduce the readability of the book, so oftentimes book authors are given a bit more leeway than what would be acceptable in a research article.
What I assumed happened here is that either some references are simply missing (as Solar Mike said), or that it has been later on determined that some parts of the book should really reference more explicitly where the respective content came from (either because the original author complained or because the book author decided that some more references would help a reader find additional information). I would not assume this to mean that the book author blatantly copied material from somewhere (this, presumably, would not lead to a correction but to withdrawing the entire book, because it also sounds like a copyright nightmare for the publisher).
answered 17 hours ago
xLeitixxLeitix
103k37246388
103k37246388
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
add a comment |
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
1
1
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
Good point about providing the reader with more information - I came across an astonishing unreferenced assertion in an MA-level textbook a while back and still haven't been able to track down any information about where it comes from or what evidence exists that it's true.
– Robert Columbia
14 hours ago
2
2
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
I'm not sure I agree, here. The word "inadequate" implies that something was actually wrong before; if I wanted to describe a situation in which the author had woken up one morning and thought, "Hey, the referencing in chapter 6 is OK but it could use some extra references to help the reader along", I'd use words like "improved referencing".
– David Richerby
12 hours ago
1
1
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
I have to say, I am aware that the Professor was known to have a few problems with regards to sloppiness in citation practice. I'm not sure I buy the argument that in a textbook, it's kind of ok to be sloppy with citiations
– user1778351
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps the professor had included an incomplete bibliography in the first submitted version, so inline text references were there but not in the biblio...
Annoying for the professor, embarrassing possibly, but easily corrected, however, what it was I don't know.
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps the professor had included an incomplete bibliography in the first submitted version, so inline text references were there but not in the biblio...
Annoying for the professor, embarrassing possibly, but easily corrected, however, what it was I don't know.
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
add a comment |
Perhaps the professor had included an incomplete bibliography in the first submitted version, so inline text references were there but not in the biblio...
Annoying for the professor, embarrassing possibly, but easily corrected, however, what it was I don't know.
Perhaps the professor had included an incomplete bibliography in the first submitted version, so inline text references were there but not in the biblio...
Annoying for the professor, embarrassing possibly, but easily corrected, however, what it was I don't know.
answered 18 hours ago
Solar MikeSolar Mike
14.1k52651
14.1k52651
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
add a comment |
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
What you're describing is a simple clerical error. I doubt they'd use a term like "inadequate" to describe something like that.
– David Richerby
9 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm guessing it's a euphemism for dubious content, rather than plagiarism.
While books should cite their sources, it is not necessary to cite every single fact. The book's author (who is an expert on the topic) will justify or prove most facts in the course of the discussion. It's good practice to include a bibliography showing relevant primary sources (e.g., for further reading); however, merely summarizing a published paper in a textbook does not necessarily require a citation (e.g., we do not cite Newton's papers in introductory physics books). Citations are really only needed when facts are asserted without being proven or justified through the narrative.
In this case, the word "inadequate" does make it seem that there was a problem. This could be a euphemism for plagiarism: word-for-word copying, or not meeting the publisher's standards in terms of referencing relevant work. Or, it could be that the author stated a lot of facts without justification or citation, and some of them turned out to be dubious or even wrong. That's my guess.
add a comment |
I'm guessing it's a euphemism for dubious content, rather than plagiarism.
While books should cite their sources, it is not necessary to cite every single fact. The book's author (who is an expert on the topic) will justify or prove most facts in the course of the discussion. It's good practice to include a bibliography showing relevant primary sources (e.g., for further reading); however, merely summarizing a published paper in a textbook does not necessarily require a citation (e.g., we do not cite Newton's papers in introductory physics books). Citations are really only needed when facts are asserted without being proven or justified through the narrative.
In this case, the word "inadequate" does make it seem that there was a problem. This could be a euphemism for plagiarism: word-for-word copying, or not meeting the publisher's standards in terms of referencing relevant work. Or, it could be that the author stated a lot of facts without justification or citation, and some of them turned out to be dubious or even wrong. That's my guess.
add a comment |
I'm guessing it's a euphemism for dubious content, rather than plagiarism.
While books should cite their sources, it is not necessary to cite every single fact. The book's author (who is an expert on the topic) will justify or prove most facts in the course of the discussion. It's good practice to include a bibliography showing relevant primary sources (e.g., for further reading); however, merely summarizing a published paper in a textbook does not necessarily require a citation (e.g., we do not cite Newton's papers in introductory physics books). Citations are really only needed when facts are asserted without being proven or justified through the narrative.
In this case, the word "inadequate" does make it seem that there was a problem. This could be a euphemism for plagiarism: word-for-word copying, or not meeting the publisher's standards in terms of referencing relevant work. Or, it could be that the author stated a lot of facts without justification or citation, and some of them turned out to be dubious or even wrong. That's my guess.
I'm guessing it's a euphemism for dubious content, rather than plagiarism.
While books should cite their sources, it is not necessary to cite every single fact. The book's author (who is an expert on the topic) will justify or prove most facts in the course of the discussion. It's good practice to include a bibliography showing relevant primary sources (e.g., for further reading); however, merely summarizing a published paper in a textbook does not necessarily require a citation (e.g., we do not cite Newton's papers in introductory physics books). Citations are really only needed when facts are asserted without being proven or justified through the narrative.
In this case, the word "inadequate" does make it seem that there was a problem. This could be a euphemism for plagiarism: word-for-word copying, or not meeting the publisher's standards in terms of referencing relevant work. Or, it could be that the author stated a lot of facts without justification or citation, and some of them turned out to be dubious or even wrong. That's my guess.
answered 8 hours ago
cag51cag51
16.7k63461
16.7k63461
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126629%2fis-inadequate-referencing-a-euphemism-for-plagiarism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
It could be a matter of taste for the editor. I've had one editor tell me every single sentence should cite to some sort of support, and another that hated "Id" and "Ibid" and insisted those be left out. In my opinion, the sweet spot is in between.
– TimothyAWiseman
6 hours ago