Publication rules about duplication generally apply to the data and findings reported (except for review and theoretical articles that don't present original data). In this case, each manuscript reported different data and different findings. In this sense, they are independent.
Is the unique contribution of the article the findings or the literature review supporting the question posed? It seems a bit odd that the research questions posed in each article were supported by identical literature reviews, since the questions were different. I can understand some overlap, but not identical literature reviews. Perhaps the commonalities in the introductions were overstated? Another issue might be the chopping up of a study and piecemeal publication of the findings to get more publication count "bang" for the effort. Editors of journals discourage authors from chopping up work that might be better presented as a larger manuscript. But in some cases, questions related to different questions and audiences are deliberately interleaved. It might be a legitimate choice to present these finding separately. In either case, although we might object to the practice of piecemeal publication, I don't think it is plagiarism. Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment Associate Professor, Psychology University of West Florida Pensacola, FL 32514 - 5751 Phone: (850) 857-6355 or 473-7435 e-mail: csta...@uwf.edu CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/ Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm -----Original Message----- From: Shearon, Tim [mailto:tshea...@collegeofidaho.edu] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 12:52 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: RE: [tips] Can you plagiarize your own work? Paul- You said: "And since plagiarism is a legal construct, does the author sue herself?" Paul- I do not think that is correct (but would welcome correction). Plagiarism is a set of standards and agreements within a community not a set of laws protecting intellectual property. That is the issue of copyright with its own set of difficulties and dilemmas. I believe this discussion has confused plagiarism and copyright violation which is often the case- and some of that is due to confusions within the two sets of norms and very unclear boundaries. I think you were correct when you started by pointing out that violating a/the journal's publication rules wasn't the same thing as plagiarism. But I'd add, which isn't the same thing as copyright violation. Tim _______________________________ Timothy O. Shearon, PhD Professor and Chair Department of Psychology The College of Idaho Caldwell, ID 83605 email: tshea...@collegeofidaho.edu teaching: intro to neuropsychology; psychopharmacology; general; history and systems "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." Dorothy Parker --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
