After 10 years of tertiary-level education, something that still confuses me is plagiarism. The definition of plagiarism seems clear, “plagiarize” means to “steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own”, “use (another's production) without crediting the source”, “to commit literary theft”, “present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source” (Merriam-Webster online dictionary).
Throughout our school and work career we have been threatened by the consequences of plagiarism:
These consequences are relatively easy to enforce if they happen internally within an institution or you have a lot of money. There still lies challenges in the quantification of plagiarism. What percentage of stealing, use or theft needs to occur before someone deserves to face the consequences of their actions?
The focus of this blog post is a review on the types of plagiarisms, different free plagiarism tools, a comparison of two masters thesis and concludes with an open question of is it plagiarism or not?
Throughout our school and work career we have been threatened by the consequences of plagiarism:
- Expelled from your course
- Your work being discredited
- Expulsion from your academic institution
- Legal consequences
These consequences are relatively easy to enforce if they happen internally within an institution or you have a lot of money. There still lies challenges in the quantification of plagiarism. What percentage of stealing, use or theft needs to occur before someone deserves to face the consequences of their actions?
The focus of this blog post is a review on the types of plagiarisms, different free plagiarism tools, a comparison of two masters thesis and concludes with an open question of is it plagiarism or not?
Types of plagiarism
Georgetown University gave a nice example describing five types of plagiarism:
The easiest to quantify is always the word-for-word plagiarisms but paraphrasing, mosaic and apt phrases becomes more difficult as it transitions into a grey area of plagiarisms. Maybe easier to rely on some of the tools available to help with the quantification.
- word-for-word
- quotation marks
- paraphrasing
- mosaic
- the apt phrase
The easiest to quantify is always the word-for-word plagiarisms but paraphrasing, mosaic and apt phrases becomes more difficult as it transitions into a grey area of plagiarisms. Maybe easier to rely on some of the tools available to help with the quantification.
Plagiarism tools
After some googling of different plagiarisms tools, I found a nice review written by Christopher Pappas, "Top 10 Free Plagiarism Detection Tools For eLearning Professionals (2017 Update)". For the comparison of different tools we'll use two theses, one written by Mohammed Abou-Galala "Enhancing convergence time for precise point positioning through multipath observable" and the other written by myself, "Reduction of initial convergence period in GPS PPP data processing".
Of the different tools listed, the only one that was capable of compared the two PDFs was copyleaks, which stated only 1380 copied words therefore only 6.9% identical. Copyleaks stated they test for similar string of words, paraphrasing, and sentence restructuring.
- Dupli Checker
- Copyleaks
- PaperRater
- Plagiarisma
- Plagiarism Checker
- Plagium
- PlagScan
- PlagTracker
- Quetext
- Viper
Of the different tools listed, the only one that was capable of compared the two PDFs was copyleaks, which stated only 1380 copied words therefore only 6.9% identical. Copyleaks stated they test for similar string of words, paraphrasing, and sentence restructuring.
Direct comparison
For the first direct comparison we will primarily focus on Chapter 3 and Chapter 4.
Chapter 3: Mansoura-PPP software and Convergence Time vs PPP Convergence Period and Initialization
I looked at accuracy specifications from Precision Agriculture, Hydrographic Surveying, Remote Sensing and Geodetic Control Surveying where as Mohammed did all except Remote sensing.
Precision agriculture
Hydrographic surveying
Geodetic Control Surveying
Chapter 4: Pseudorange Multipath and Noise Mitigation Techniques vs Mitigating Pseudorange Mutipath and Noise
A thesis has a general structure. Introduction, Literature review, Methodology, Novel Chapter and Conclusions. While I took most pride in my Chapter 3 research as it felt like it was the most useful to most readers, Chapter 4 was the core novelty of my thesis research.
Content overview
Satellite Repeat Period
Stochastic Weighting Scheme
Stochastic weights results
Conclusion
Based on the definition of plagiarism from Merriam-Webster online dictionary, plagiarism occurs when someone uses another's production without crediting the source. The following is a screen shot of Mohammed's reference list. But to be fair, Mohammed did mention me in his acknowledgements, "I would like to thank the senior researcher Garrett Seepersad for helping me to get the internal files of the program and benefitting from his brilliant publications." Maybe this is sufficient to satisfy Merriam-Webster online dictionary definition, therefore plagiarism didn't occur? He said my name and acknowledged that he benefited from my publications. This is why I leave this blog post with an unanswered question of if this is plagiarism or not because it isn't clear to me. I've used online tools to independently compare the two theses and only one of the 10 websites were able to complete the analysis with only a 6.9% match.
My intention with this blog post isn't to defame or discredit anyone. My focus with my blog posts has always been to teach and share my GNSS knowledge and experiences.
For this post, I turn to you for advice... does this qualify as plagiarism?
My intention with this blog post isn't to defame or discredit anyone. My focus with my blog posts has always been to teach and share my GNSS knowledge and experiences.
For this post, I turn to you for advice... does this qualify as plagiarism?