I knew the musician analogy was weak... but it's interesting in some ways. I am in a continuous conversation with a musician friend of mine about the similarities and differences between the visual and "auditory" arts in terms of "replication". The analogies seem to "work better" and are more interesting in that regard.
======================================================== Steven M. Specht, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Department of Psychology Utica College Utica, NY 13502 (315) 792-3171 monkeybrain-collagist.blogspot.com "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." Martin Luther King Jr. On Sep 15, 2010, at 12:30 PM, Rick Froman wrote: > > > I agree that it is fine to reproduce certain sections of a paper intact in a > subsequent paper and most people cited in the article didn’t seem to have a > problem with that (especially in the Method section). The main concern is > with how much of that can be done while still being considered a new > publication. I think most would agree, the more significant violation would > be presenting the exact same findings under an entirely different title, > changing only the specific wording to avoid plagiarism detection. So it is > not really the wording that is at issue but the originality of the findings. > The same findings shouldn’t be produced in different publications just to pad > a CV. > > I think the musician analogy breaks down pretty quickly. A musician might > play the same piece to different audiences (some who might want to relive the > experience a number of times) hundreds or even thousands of times. Is it > really then OK for a researcher to publish the same work with a few ad libs > here and there hundreds or thousands of times to the same scholarly > readership? I think scholarly publication and live musical performances > differ in many respects. I do think a musician would lose fans pretty quickly > (and many have) by just re-packaging old stuff reworked into a new album. As > far as publication (recording) goes, listeners will feel cheated when buying > an album that is nothing but previously released songs masquerading as a new > album. > > Rick > > Dr. Rick Froman, Chair > Division of Humanities and Social Sciences > Professor of Psychology > Box 3055 > John Brown University > 2000 W. University Siloam Springs, AR 72761 > rfro...@jbu.edu > (479)524-7295 > http://tinyurl.com/DrFroman > > > From: Steven Specht [mailto:sspe...@utica.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 11:20 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: Re: [tips] Self-plagiarism > > I agree with Annette. There are good and better ways to write a succinct > explanation of the concept of contrast effects in sensory research. Once I > had invested a great deal of time crafting what I thought was "the" best > sentence, why would I change it just to avoid plagiarizing myself? I would > argue that that would've created a lesser quality sentence. Are musicians > plagiarizing themselves with each new performance of a song? Or when they > make an acoustic version from an "electric" or orchestrated version? > > > > ======================================================== > Steven M. Specht, Ph.D. > Professor of Psychology > Department of Psychology > Utica College > Utica, NY 13502 > (315) 792-3171 > monkeybrain-collagist.blogspot.com > > "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort > and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." > Martin Luther King Jr. > > On Sep 15, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Annette Taylor wrote: > > > > > I have to disagree with Miguel here... agree with Barbato. I have spent the > last decade researching a single paradigm and plan to do so until I retire > probably. It has taken me years to phrase some of the basics in the most > clear way so that others can understand what I mean. I don't want to have to > think of more alternative ways to say some things. I had to really craft the > text of the basic ideas carefully because I'm trying to explain some > relatively abstract concepts in the most effective way possible for the > listener/reader. So to have to redo this in a potentially less effective way > to avoid self-plagiarism seems down right silly. They are my words that I > worked on, and if they form the foundation of parts of the introduction and > methods section then I can't believe it's a problem to reuse them whenever I > write about the same topic. In fact, I have tried to just free write the > methods section in subsequent papers and found myself repeating myself > verbatim without even trying. > > I an left asking myself if we haven't had the pendulum swing too far, once we > have to worry about repeating parts of introductory explanations to set the > stage for a new study, as being somehow "dishonest" or lacking "integrity." > > Just my 2 cents here. What do the others on the list think? > > Annette > > Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. > Professor, Psychological Sciences > University of San Diego > 5998 Alcala Park > San Diego, CA 92110 > tay...@sandiego.edu > > From: Rick Froman [rfro...@jbu.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 7:58 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: [tips] Self-plagiarism > > > > http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57676/ > > Interesting post on The Scientist.com with quotes from TIPSter (and > plagiarism expert) Miguel Roig. (I don’t mean that he is good at it, just > that he knows a lot about it.) > > Rick > > Rick Froman > rfro...@jbu.edu > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: tay...@sandiego.edu. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a21b0&n=T&l=tips&o=4833 > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > or send a blank email to > leave-4833-13534.4204dc3a11678c6b1d0be57cfe0a2...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: sspe...@utica.edu. > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13522.468cbac056133a996283cca7e2976336&n=T&l=tips&o=4837 > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > or send a blank email to > leave-4837-13522.468cbac056133a996283cca7e2976...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: rfro...@jbu.edu. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5f8a&n=T&l=tips&o=4840 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-4840-13039.37a56d458b5e856d05bcfb3322db5...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: sspe...@utica.edu. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13522.468cbac056133a996283cca7e2976336&n=T&l=tips&o=4841 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-4841-13522.468cbac056133a996283cca7e2976...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: arch...@jab.org. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=4851 or send a blank email to leave-4851-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
