International in scope, Plagiary: Cross-Disciplinary Studies in Plagiarism, Fabrication, and Falsification is a new scholarly journal devoted specifically to the study of plagiarism and related fabrications/falsifications within the professional literature (i.e. scholarly journals and books) and popular discourse domains (i.e. journalism, politics, audio-visual texts). Providing a forum for scholarly discussion and research on trends and phenomena (both recent and historical) related to plagiarism, Plagiary features refereed research articles, “Perspectives” articles, book reviews, editorials, and responses as a point of focus on issues of vital importance to professional and popular discourse communities.
The now somewhat archaic term “Plagiary” will be re-invented, re-invigorated, and used in this publication as a “cover symbol” for the various forms of plagiarism/fabrication/falsification and related fraudulent behaviors which afflict and cheapen modern discourse. In addition to redundancy, information overload and the like, discourse communities must now grapple with some rather serious forms of textual fraud being discovered on a regular basis. Yet along with such fraudulent representations which seem to be quite common across various discourse communities, there are also legitimate means of derivative expression, and studies which analyze such topics as mimicry, parody, pastiche and the like are welcome for publications consideration. Plagiary will educate, critique, inform and keep discourse communities aware of current issues and developments across the disciplines.
There has been a tremendous interest in these issues related to plagiarism/fabrication/falsification, but the current publications seem to be “all over the place” as reflected in the list of publications below. This new journal will hopefully bring together existing strands of scholarship and create a point of focus for lively discussion, ongoing debate, and presentation of research results.
The following list of previously published papers/articles illustrate the potential scope and cross-disciplinary coverage in a publication such as Plagiary [Note that some of these papers are brief articles whose topics are deserving of much more thorough treatment since they were first written; hence the need for further research to bring focus to and a deeper understanding of these important issues]. See also the list of ideas on the author information page for topics, titles, and themes of importance to studies in plagiary.
Various Publications Related to Plagiarism/Fabrication/Falsification
Aguirre, J. (2004). “Plagiarism in Palaeontology. A New Threat Within the Scientific Community.” Revista Española de Micropaleontología, 36 (2): 349-352.
Brown, A. S. and Murphy, D. R. (1989). Cryptomnesia: Delineating inadvertent plagiarism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15 (3): 432-442.
Clough, P. D. “Measuring Text Reuse in a Journalistic Domain.” Unpublished manuscript. Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield. Retrieved from http://ir.shef.ac.uk/cloughie/papers/cluk4.pdf
Deckert, G.D. (1993). “Perspectives on Plagiarism from ESL Students in Hong Kong.” Journal of Second Language Writing, 2 (2): 131–148.
Glass, L. (1999). “Nobody’s Renown: Plagiarism and Publicity in the Career of Jack London.” American Literature, 71 (3): 529-549
Grunebaum, Gustave E. von. (1944, October). The concept of plagiarism in Arabic theory. Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 3 (4), pp. 234-253. [Many other literary traditions might be analyzed as Grunebaum did with the Arabic literary tradition]
Kock, N. (1999). “A Case of Academic Plagiarism.” Communications of the ACM, 42 (7): 96-104.
Marshall, E. (1998). “Medline Searches Turn Up Cases of Suspected Plagiarism.” Science, 279: 473–74.
Mason, W. (2005). “Make it Newish: E.E. Cummings, plagiarism, and the perils of originality.” Harper’s Magazine. May edition: 92-102.
Miller, K. D. (1993). Redefining plagiarism: Martin Luther King’s use of an oral tradition. The Chronicle of Higher Education Jan 20: A60.
Newmark, J. (2005). “‘Frozen’ Breaks the Ice Around Theatrical Plagiarism.” St. Louis Post-Dispatch. January 23.
Norris, H.T. (1994). From Asia to Africa: The “Tuhfat al-Albab” by Abu Hamid al-Gharnati (473/1080-565/1169) as a source for the chronology and content of the “Sirat ‘Antar B. Shaddad”. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, vol. 57 (1), pp. 174-183.
Park, C. (2003). In other (People’s) words: plagiarism by university students—literature and lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 28 (5), 471-488.
Rivoire, K. (2003). “The Growing Threat to Research: Scientific Misconduct.” MURJ, 8: 21-26.
Rodrigues, L. (1998). “A Compliment: Having Your Research Ideas Stolen.” British Medical Journal Middle East, 5 (55): 51.
Rubin, B. (2003). British government plagiarizes MERIA Journal: Our response. Retreived from MERIA Journal website http://meria.idc.ac.il/british-govt-plagiarizes-meria.html
Scollon, R. (1995). Plagiarism and ideology: Identity in intercultural discourse. Language in Society, 24: 1-28.
Tenpenny, P.L, Keriazakos, M.S. and Lew, G.S. (1998). “In search of inadvertent plagiarism.” The American Journal of Psychology, 111 (4): 529– 59.
Willinsky, J. (1990) Intellectual property rights and responsibilities: The state of the text. The Journal of Educational Thought, 24 (3): 68-82