Search results

In scholarly publications, citations play an essential epistemic role in creating and disseminating knowledge. Conversely, the use of problematic citations impedes the growth of knowledge, contaminates the knowledge base and disserves science. This study investigates the presence of problematic citations in the works of business ethics scholars.

The authors investigated two types of problematic citations: inaccurate citations and plagiarized citations. For this, 1,200 randomly selected citations from three leading business ethics journals were assessed based on: (1) referenced journal errors, (2) article title errors and (3) author name errors. Other papers that replicated the same title errors were identified.

Of the citations in the examined business ethics journals, 21.42% have at least one error. Of particular concern are the citation errors in article titles, where 3.75% of examined citations have minor errors and another 3.75% display major errors – 7.5% in total. Two-thirds of minor and major title errors were repeatedly replicated in previous and ensuing publications, which confirms the presence of citation plagiarism. An average article published in a business ethics journal contains at least three plagiarized citations. Even though business ethics fares well compared to other disciplines, a situation where every fifth citation is problematic is unacceptable.

Business ethics scholars are not immune to the use of problematic citations, and it is unlikely that attempting to improve researchers' awareness of the unethicality of this behavior will bring a desirable outcome.

Identifying that problematic citations exist in the business ethics literature is novel because it is expected that these researchers would not condone this practice.

This study explores the use and perceptions of scholarly journal ranking lists in the management field based on stakeholders’ lived experience.

The results are based on a survey of 463 active knowledge management and intellectual capital researchers.

Journal ranking lists have become an integral part of contemporary management academia: 33% and 37% of institutions and individual scholars employ journal ranking lists, respectively. The Australian Business Deans Council (ABDC) Journal Quality List and the UK Academic Journal Guide (AJG) by the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CABS) are the most frequently used national lists, and their influence has spread far beyond the national borders. Some institutions and individuals create their own journal rankings.

Management researchers employ journal ranking lists under two conditions: mandatory and voluntary. The forced mode of use is necessary to comply with institutional pressure that restrains the choice of target outlets. At the same time, researchers willingly consult ranking lists to advance their personal career, maximize their research exposure, learn about the relative standing of unfamiliar journals, and direct their students. Scholars, academic administrators, and policymakers should realize that journal ranking lists may serve as a useful tool when used appropriately, in particular when individuals themselves decide how and for what purpose to employ them to inform their research practices.

The findings reveal a journal ranking lists paradox: management researchers are aware of the limitations of ranking lists and their deleterious impact on scientific progress; however, they generally find journal ranking lists to be useful and employ them.

The purpose of this study is to explore Master’s students’ literature reviews to better understand the literacies required for engaging in complexity in this genre and to inform graduate student pedagogy.

In this qualitative study, data were collected in the form of student literature review papers (23 drafts and 23 final versions) from students attending a research seminar course in an all-course Master’s program. All papers were analyzed for citations patterns, genre awareness and levels of complexity.

Results highlight the nature of complexity in this genre – that this complexity is underpinned by discursive issues such as “truth”, “claims” or “facts” that often mislead novice academic writers, and recognizing that knowledge contested in academic contexts is important to understanding and teaching students about complexity in writing.

One of the most challenging writing tasks graduate students face, is the literature review. Literature reviews require sophisticated conceptual maneuverings. Despite being analytical in nature, many students find it difficult to engage with the layers of complexity required in this genre. How do we make the complexity in literature reviews more visible and accessible? The argument in this paper is that understanding the nature of complexity in literature reviews can enhance writing processes and intentional explicit pedagogy.

The purpose of this paper is to sensitize researchers to qualitative citation patterns that characterize original research, contribute toward the growth of knowledge and, ultimately, promote scientific progress.

This study describes how ideas are intertextually inserted into citing works to create new concepts and theories, thereby contributing to the growth of knowledge. By combining existing perspectives and dimensions of citations with Foucauldian theory, this study develops a typology of qualitative citation patterns for the growth of knowledge and uses examples from two classic works to illustrate how these citation patterns can be identified and applied.

A clearer understanding of the motivations behind citations becomes possible by focusing on the qualitative patterns of citations rather than on their quantitative features. The proposed typology includes the following patterns: original, conceptual, organic, juxtapositional, peripheral, persuasive, acknowledgment, perfunctory, inconsistent and plagiaristic.

In contrast to quantitative evaluations of the role and value of citations, this study focuses on the qualitative characteristics of citations, in the form of specific patterns of citations that engender original and novel research and those that may not. By integrating Foucauldian analysis of discourse with existing theories of citations, this study offers a more nuanced and refined typology of citations that can be used by researchers to gain a deeper semantic understanding of citations.

This paper aims to compare guidelines for authors in Croatian scholarly journals regarding six scientific fields (according to Croatian classification) and to show the representation of technical and ethical issues that are explained in guidelines for authors.

The aim of the research is to identify elements that are included in guidelines for authors in Croatian scholarly journals from all scientific fields. Fourteen parameters for 200 journals were analyzed (all the journals that had published at least one 2016 issue by the end of February 2017).

The parameter that is explained in the most journals is the length of the manuscript (91.5 per cent). The lowest number of journals explains Open Researcher and Contributor ID (1.5 per cent). The highest percentage of journals that explain plagiarism is in the field of natural sciences (44 per cent). As compared to the results of previous researches, there is an increase in the number of ethical questions mentioned in the guidelines for authors of Croatian scholarly journals.

This paper provides recommendations and suggestions that could help journal editors make guidelines for authors more informative. That could help in advancing editorial process (e.g. peer review process) and in avoiding misconducts (e.g. plagiarism or false attribution of authorship).

This paper is the first detailed content analysis of guidelines for authors in all Croatian scholarly journals.

The purpose of this paper is to describe how plagiarism and the detection of plagiarism are interwoven with the education of international students.

The literature searches encompassed articles on the issue of plagiarism as it affects students coming from abroad.

There is a definite problem involved in the interaction of international students in a higher education setting and plagiarism.

Although no survey was done for this article, much of the information gathered regarding plagiarism is dependent on external surveys. These surveys may not always be answered truthfully despite anonymity. There is also a dearth of data on plagiarism and international students. There is some anecdotal data on the subject.

Although plagiarism is a serious problem on academic campuses, libraries and librarians can offer substantial help in deterring and preventing plagiarism especially with regard to international students.

Librarians, knowledgeable about citation style sheets and formats, can be very valuable to international students who lack the skills. Students can learn to improve their citation skills with the help of a librarian with good bibliographic skills.

This paper discusses the importance of developing a discipline‐based approach to the issue of plagiarism in information literacy instruction sessions. Through an examination of how both higher education and academic librarianship view plagiarism, the growing need for anti‐plagiarism instruction, and the role librarians can take in anti‐plagiarism instruction, this article will offer insight into effective ways for librarians to reach out to both faculty and students facing the difficulties inherent in higher education in the wake of the cut and paste age. Practical examples of discipline‐specific, collaborative approaches and process‐based assignments in journalism will be discussed to show how both librarians and discipline faculty can successfully make connections between student needs and collective information literacy instruction activities.

Many scholars have recognized the cultural dependency of the concept of plagiarism and have investigated the influence of cultural attitude on university students' plagiarism; however, since the findings are inconsistent and because plagiarism is a major concern in academic institutions in Asia, we were motivated to examine the understanding and prevalence of plagiarism among Canadian and some Asian language students.

To elicit the data, the questionnaire developed by Maxwell et al. (2008) was adapted for this study. The scale included three sections. In the initial section, the students' background information was inquired. Section two included 10 scenarios, all of which consisted of two levels; understanding and experience. Section three of the scale consisted of five open-ended questions. In fact, the questions intended to complement the survey findings. Finally, in the fourth section, five yes/no questions were asked. Because the respondents could evade answering some open-ended questions, we developed five questions with yes/no answers in order to probe deeper into the participants' answers.

The results showed significant differences among the participants concerning both understanding and prevalence of plagiarism. Most of the differences were between Canadian and Asian students in that Canadians had a higher level of understanding. They also enjoyed a lower rate of incidence of plagiarism. Nevertheless, further analyses revealed that the students' academic misconduct is probably influenced by other factors including lack of proper education rather than cultural differences.

The findings lead us to argue that cultural differences may not be the main source of the prevalence of plagiarism across nations and that Asian language university students plagiarize mainly due to a lack of understanding of the principles of plagiarism. Therefore, Asian universities should take measures to make sure that they promote language students' understanding regarding the misconduct.

Apart from a few studies, no other study has scrutinized plagiarism across cultures. As such, our study attempted to shed more light on the student, especially language students' plagiarism across different nations.

The purpose of this study is to examine undergraduate accounting students' perceptions of factors contributing to plagiarism activities.

Survey methods were used to investigate the prominence of different factors, and any differences associated with student characteristics.

The results suggested that factors contributing to plagiarism include lack of awareness, lack of understanding, lack of competence, and personal attitudes. No evidence was found to support the suggestion that either pressure or the availability of internet facilities had increased the incidence of plagiarism. The study provided evidence that a significant proportion of Malaysian undergraduate accounting students in the study had engaged in plagiarism activities to a limited degree; the observed profile was consistent with the incidence of plagiarism activities being associated with academically weaker, male students with a negative attitude to their studies.

The findings have significant implications for educators if they are to improve the detection and punishment of plagiarism activity, and educate potential perpetrators.