Department of Medical Humanities, School of Humanities, Southeast University, Nanjing, 211189, China.
Centre for Environment and Health, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Aug 8;23(1):78. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00818-4.
Existing research on perceptions of plagiarism and cultural influences mainly focuses on comparisons between the Western World and the Eastern World. However, possible differences within the Western World have hardly been assessed, especially among biomedical academics. The authors compared perceptions of plagiarism among European biomedical researchers who participated in an online survey.
The present work is based on the data collected in a previous online survey done in 2018 among biomedical researchers working in leading European and Chinese universities. Respondents based in Europe were grouped into three geographical regions (northern Europe, southern Europe and northwestern Europe) and their responses were analyzed using logistic regression analysis with adjustments for demographic factors.
Data were available from 810 respondents (265 northern Europe, 101 southern Europe, 444 northwestern Europe). In addition to their generally similar responses, different perceptions of plagiarism were observed among respondents in the three European regions. In summary, among the three European regions, Nordic respondents identified the most types of practices as plagiarism. Compared to the southern respondents, Nordic and northwestern respondents were more likely to consider less evident practices as plagiarism, such as Rephrasing another person's work without crediting the source [aOR 1.99 (95%CI 1.08;3.67), aOR 0.50 (95%CI 0.28;0.91)] and With permission from the original author, using another's text without crediting the source [aOR 3.16 (95%CI 1.90;5.25), aOR 0.26 (95%CI 0.16;0.42)]. In contrast, the southern respondents were the most inclined to recognize recycling of one's previously rejected research proposal as plagiarism.
In spite of a generally similar response pattern, the present study indicates different perceptions of plagiarism among European biomedical researchers. These intra-European differences should be considered when addressing plagiarism.
现有的关于剽窃认知和文化影响的研究主要集中在西方世界和东方世界之间的比较。然而,几乎没有评估过西方世界内部的差异,尤其是在生物医学学术界中。作者比较了参加在线调查的欧洲生物医学研究人员对剽窃的看法。
本研究基于 2018 年在欧洲和中国领先大学工作的生物医学研究人员进行的先前在线调查中收集的数据。将在欧洲的受访者分为三个地理区域(北欧、南欧和西北欧),并使用逻辑回归分析对其进行分析,同时对人口统计学因素进行调整。
共获得 810 名受访者的数据(北欧 265 名,南欧 101 名,西北欧 444 名)。除了他们普遍相似的回答外,在三个欧洲地区的受访者中观察到对剽窃的不同看法。总的来说,在这三个欧洲地区中,北欧受访者确定了最多类型的行为属于剽窃。与南欧受访者相比,北欧和西北欧受访者更有可能将不太明显的行为视为剽窃,例如不引用来源而改写他人的作品[aOR 1.99(95%CI 1.08;3.67),aOR 0.50(95%CI 0.28;0.91)]和在原作者许可下,不引用来源而使用他人的文本[aOR 3.16(95%CI 1.90;5.25),aOR 0.26(95%CI 0.16;0.42)]。相比之下,南欧受访者最倾向于将自己先前被拒绝的研究提案的重复使用视为剽窃。
尽管有普遍相似的反应模式,但本研究表明欧洲生物医学研究人员对剽窃的看法存在差异。在处理剽窃问题时,应考虑这些欧洲内部的差异。