Academic Writing and the Internet: Cyber-Plagiarism amongst University Students

IF 4.2 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research Pub Date : 2019-07-15 DOI:10.7821/NAER.2019.7.407
Nechita Olivia-Dumitrina, Montserrat Casanovas, Yolanda Capdevila
{"title":"Academic Writing and the Internet: Cyber-Plagiarism amongst University Students","authors":"Nechita Olivia-Dumitrina, Montserrat Casanovas, Yolanda Capdevila","doi":"10.7821/NAER.2019.7.407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research aims to present a number of findings on the perception that university students have on academic plagiarism. Data has been collected on the procedures of copy and paste, paraphrase, translation, as well as the need for citation of resources taken from the Internet. This study was carried out at the University of Lleida (UdL), via an online questionnaire administered to 1150 first-year students. The results show similar figures in the understanding of plagiarism with respect to two procedures: copy and paste (69.3%) and paraphrase (68.3%). In the case of translation, the figure is higher with 82.1% of students considering that translating a text is plagiarism. Regarding the need to cite digital sources, 13.6% argue it is not necessary. When analysing the results according to the different faculties and affiliated schools, no pattern of behaviour has been detected in relation to the typology of the degree students were enrolled in, but a trend towards different behaviours can be observed in the two faculties in which students have received specific training within the framework of subjects of their degrees (Faculty of Nursing and Physiotherapy and Faculty of Education, Psychology and Social Work). In these cases, the figures related to acknowledging plagiarism procedures are higher and so is the percentage of students who say that resources taken from the Internet should be cited. This leads us to conclude, in line with other studies that have dealt with the same subject, that training is key to tackling the issue of plagiarism in higher education.","PeriodicalId":51833,"journal":{"name":"Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7821/NAER.2019.7.407","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

This research aims to present a number of findings on the perception that university students have on academic plagiarism. Data has been collected on the procedures of copy and paste, paraphrase, translation, as well as the need for citation of resources taken from the Internet. This study was carried out at the University of Lleida (UdL), via an online questionnaire administered to 1150 first-year students. The results show similar figures in the understanding of plagiarism with respect to two procedures: copy and paste (69.3%) and paraphrase (68.3%). In the case of translation, the figure is higher with 82.1% of students considering that translating a text is plagiarism. Regarding the need to cite digital sources, 13.6% argue it is not necessary. When analysing the results according to the different faculties and affiliated schools, no pattern of behaviour has been detected in relation to the typology of the degree students were enrolled in, but a trend towards different behaviours can be observed in the two faculties in which students have received specific training within the framework of subjects of their degrees (Faculty of Nursing and Physiotherapy and Faculty of Education, Psychology and Social Work). In these cases, the figures related to acknowledging plagiarism procedures are higher and so is the percentage of students who say that resources taken from the Internet should be cited. This leads us to conclude, in line with other studies that have dealt with the same subject, that training is key to tackling the issue of plagiarism in higher education.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
学术写作与网络:大学生网络剽窃
本研究旨在就大学生对学术剽窃的看法提出一些发现。已经收集了关于复制粘贴、转述、翻译程序以及引用互联网资源的必要性的数据。这项研究是在莱里达大学进行的,通过对1150名一年级学生进行的在线问卷调查。结果显示,在复制粘贴(69.3%)和转述(68.3%)这两个程序中,对剽窃的理解程度相似。在翻译的情况下,这一数字更高,82.1%的学生认为翻译文本是剽窃。关于引用数字资源的必要性,13.6%的人认为没有必要。在根据不同的学院和附属学校分析结果时,没有发现与学生就读的学位类型有关的行为模式,但在两个学院(护理和物理治疗学院和教育、心理和社会工作学院),学生在其学位范围内接受了特定培训,可以观察到不同行为的趋势。在这些情况下,与承认抄袭程序有关的数字更高,认为应该引用从互联网上获取的资源的学生比例也更高。这使我们得出结论,与处理同一主题的其他研究一样,培训是解决高等教育抄袭问题的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research
Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
4.40%
发文量
20
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊介绍: NAER seeks academic articles on educational sciences based on innovative experiences which can contribute the development of the educational sciences in any of their manifestations and provide new approaches to teaching as a response to the deep changes our society is going through.
期刊最新文献
Improving reporting standards in quantitative educational intervention research: introducing the CLOSER and CIDER checklists. Violence and the Right to Education in the Northern Triangle of Central America The 'Birth of Doubt' and 'The Existence of Other Possibilities': Exploring How the ACAD Toolkit Supports Design for Learning Suicidal Ideation in Undergraduate Students of Social Work: A Quantitative Study Moving Learning: A Systematic Review of Mobile Learning Applications for Online Higher Education
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1