Anyone who has written or graded a paper knows that plagiarism is not always a cut-and-dried issue. The difference between plagiarism and research is often elusive. Cultivating vigilant awareness of the various forms of plagiarism, especially the in more marginal cases, is an important step in the fight to prevent it.
The writer mentions an author’s name for a source, but neglects to include specific information on the location of the referenced material. This often masks other forms of plagiarism by obscuring source locations.
The writer tries to disguise plagiarism by copying from several different sources, tweaking the sentences to make them fit together while retaining most of the original phrasing.
The writer turns in another’s work, word-for-word, as his/her own.
Well, we all know it doesn’t exist. In this case, the writer properly quotes and cites sources in some places, but goes on to paraphrase other arguments from those sources without citation. This way, the writer tries to pass off the paraphrased material as his or her own analysis of the cited material.
The writer copies significant portions of text straight from a single source, without alteration.
The writer properly cites a source, but neglects to put in quotation marks text that has been copied word-for-word, or close to it. Although attributing the basic ideas to the source, the writer is falsely claiming original presentation and interpretation of the information
Although the writer has retained the essential content of the source, he/she has altered the paper’s appearance slightly by changing key words and phrases.
The writer properly cites all sources, paraphrasing and using quotations appropriately. The catch? The paper contains almost no original work! It is sometimes difficult to spot this form of plagiarism because it looks like any other well-researched document.
The writer takes the time to paraphrase most of the paper from other sources and makes it all fit together, instead of spending the same effort on original work.
The writer ‘borrows’ generously from his/her previous work, violating policies concerning the expectation of originality adopted by most academic institutions.
The writer provides inaccurate information regarding the sources, making it impossible to find them.