Once again plagiarism, that scourge of journal editors, has reared its ugly head, with an accusation that a paper published in
Minerals Engineering contains material directly copied from another author's work.
It is evident from the comments on my recent posting on
peer-review that journal referees are becoming increasingly under pressure as the flow of papers to reputable journals increases.
The number of papers is increasing because researchers are also under increasing pressure to publish, as this is often the most important route to career advancement.
Unfortunately this has led a minority to seek the easy route, and this is where plagiarism steps in. Fortunately, with increasingly efficient software it is becoming easier to spot incidents of plagiarism, and indeed it is often apparent just by reading papers, when for no apparent reason, the style or standard of English suddenly changes for a few paragraphs and then reverts to its original format.
Duplication (sometimes called self-plagiarism) is even more prevalent. This is when an author submits essentially the same paper, sometimes thinly disguised by a change in title, or order of authors, to two or more journals at the same time. If accepted then the author's list of publications is boosted, and it is often difficult to prevent this unless there is strong liaison between journal editors.
However, the author rarely gets away with this, as an eagle eye will invariably spot the duplication, maybe weeks, or even months after publication.
Authors found guilty of plagiarism are often blacklisted from publication again in the journal, but the question I ask is: is this enough, or should offenders be publicly named and shamed? I seek your views on this.
