A Question on Self-Plagiarism

[MeowMeowMeow]

Hello Grad Cafe,

My question might seem ridiculous but I'd rather be really careful about the particulars of plagiarism than regret something later.

For the last two years of my graduate degree, I have been growing a research project which I thought of, found funding for, conducted all interviews, did all field research, etc. I have developed a website to share my research with family and friends. I have also been fortunate to have written about my research for multiple major media groups (RFE/RL, Foreign Policy Magazine, etc.). I'm thrilled that my research has made its way around the web, but now that it's submission time, I am not sure what is proper procedure...

My question is as follows... when something is published online it tends to be very polished and packaged. I'd like to use some of the passages that I've written on my blog and for these publications in my dissertation because they so articulately express my research. If I properly cite these passages, am I in the clear? Keep in mind that no other figure (like an editor) spun my story in a certain way -- it was always my research, my ideas, and my own writing.

Do I have to use citations? Do I include myself in the bibliography (this sounds embarrassing)? Do I put myself in quotations (even more embarrassing)?

Thanks! Alexis

Edited April 1, 2012 by Vito De Saint Urbain

[Eigen]

The best answer is "don't self-plagiarize". The ideas are yours, so you don't need to cite them- but the exact wording needs to change, unless you want to heavily use exact quotations of yourself, which doesn't exactly come off well either.

We run into this issue with our publications, and the answer is always to just rewrite the relevant passages. Since they're yours, you can cut it pretty close, but don't cut and paste the passages without direct quotations of yourself from whatever other source.

[Pauli]

Well, to be honest, I guess it depends on the field. I see self-plagiarism often in computer science papers, but it seems accepted in the field due to higher publication rates (that's just a quirk about computer science).

[Eigen]

Just because you see it doesn't mean it's accepted. It happens in my field, but people also get gutted for it in reviews, and it seems to diminish the impact of the work at times.

Not to mention that publishers can technically go after you for breaching agreements if they so choose.

[Pauli]

Just because you see it doesn't mean it's accepted. It happens in my field, but people also get gutted for it in reviews, and it seems to diminish the impact of the work at times.

Not to mention that publishers can technically go after you for breaching agreements if they so choose.

I honestly think it really is field dependent. Computer science papers, especially those in artificial intelligence and human-computer interaction papers, are published more often because sometimes authors release publications that are incremental improvements over their previous iteration. Furthermore, it's a waste of energy for those authors to try to reword content when the reviewers familiar with the previous work already know that they're incremental, but crucial, changes. Just because it's not accepted in one field doesn't mean it's not accepted in the other.

Edit #1: Actually, self-plagiarism is especially a very common (and accepted) practice for full-length papers that extend workshop papers, and journal papers that extend full conference papers in my field (especially in like the introduction and previous work sections). It's just like using library packages in programming code; why re-invent the wheel when you can incorporate it and focus on the ideas which improve it. But I agree that self-plagiarism is definitely frowned upon if you self-plagiarize from, say, a full conference paper to another full conference paper.

Edit #2: Oh, Eigen is in chemistry. Yeah, I'm familiar with how publications work in your field. Self-plagiarism is definitely a no-no for the natural sciences.

Edited April 1, 2012 by Pauli

[Eigen]

This is quite true abut field differences. I would bet that the author agreements you sign with publishers still include clauses that make you, as an author, liable for self plagiarization.

And I realize CS is a very different field with respect to publications, especially in the high regard for conference proceedings, it's quite an outlier to any related fields.

But I can tell you that as you drift towards the cognitive science end that it's definitely looked down upon by other researchers, at least from the discussions I hear.

The clarification on the difference between full paper to full paper and communication/proceedings to full paper makes a lot of sense, thanks for the addition.

::responses to edits::

Edited April 1, 2012 by Eigen

[Pauli]

Totally true, Eigen. To be honest Vito De Saint Urbain, you should listen to Eigen. The graduate school norm really does follow that self-plagiarism in general is a no-no.

[fluttering]

I'd like to use some of the passages that I've written on my blog and for these publications in my dissertation because they so articulately express my research. If I properly cite these passages, am I in the clear? Keep in mind that no other figure (like an editor) spun my story in a certain way -- it was always my research, my ideas, and my own writing.

Does your department/university have a policy regarding using published material in your dissertation? I know of some departments that encourage students to do their degree "by publication" so it is a series of journal articles (with some added material that ties it all together) and in these cases you can literally copy and paste the content of the journal article as a chapter of your dissertation/thesis. Then at the beginning you have a statement noting which work has already been published, and providing the citation for each chapter. Other departments are happy for students to publish as they go, but expect them to write a slightly different version of the paper for their dissertation/thesis.

[wheatGrass]

I think if it is just work on a personal blog that has only been shared with family/friends that you want to copy/paste, that would be fine. I think if you want to use work that you have actually published in one of the publications you mentioned, you need to cite yourself. I think this is the case if your blog is open to the general public, as well. I totally understand about having the perfect paragraph--sometimes you just can't rework and have it still be effective and eloquent. People cite themselves all the time! Don't think of it as self-aggrandizing. It really is a tool for the reader, who may want to check out some of your other work or see how your ideas have elvolved over time.

Edited April 2, 2012 by wheatGrass

[Pauli]

That's what I've been pretty much doing, wheatGrass. If I really like a section in my previous published works that nicely sums up something, I repost it in another research work submission with the appropriate citation.