DOCTORAL EDUCATION. Starting this fall, upon the initiative from the Council for PhD education (FUR), all half-time reports will undergo a plagiarism check using the iThenticate tool. The review is conducted to detect similarities in the texts of half-time reports and to avoid potential accusations of plagiarism.
Initially, starting March 2024, all doctoral students will be offered the opportunity to have their half-time reports reviewed. However, as of September 15 this year, the review will become mandatory for all doctoral candidates.
Enhancing quality
The half-time reports will be reviewed using iThenticate, a tool that compares the text against content available or previously published on the web. The tool highlights similarities between the text in the half-time report and previously published text. Presently, iThenticate is increasingly used by scientific journals to prevent the publication of plagiarized manuscripts.
The aim of the introduction of plagiarism checks is supporting doctoral candidates and supervisors at the faculty. Khalil Helou, the Faculty-wide Director of Graduate Education, comments:
“This is a new routine that will elevate the quality of our half-time reports. Plagiarism checks should be regarded as a step in the doctoral student’s education, emphasizing their contribution to new research,” states Khalil Helou.
Assisting doctoral candidates
The most common issue the new plagiarism check will address is self-plagiarism, where doctoral candidates inadvertently copy excerpts, figures, and tables from their own previous publications and incorporate them into their half-time reports and later into the thesis narrative.
When text is revised in various versions, it is not uncommon for doctoral candidates to reuse phrases, explains Khalil Helou:
“We highlight the potential issue of self-plagiarism and therefore urge all doctoral candidates to refrain from reusing texts from their unpublished manuscripts in the half-time report,” he says.
Avoiding this is crucial to prevent potential complications in the future, especially when writing their thesis narratives, he says. Situations have occurred at Sahlgrenska Academy where doctoral candidates have encountered problems when their manuscripts have been caught in the journal’s plagiarism check. This has happened due to wordings that have already been published in their previous own publications and in the thesis narrative on Gupea.
“It is of utmost importance to be aware of this and avoid self-plagiarism to ensure a smooth publishing process and to avoid any obstacles along the way,” says Khalil Helou.
He continues:
“We introduce the plagiarism check both as an educational component and to support our doctoral candidates in their later work on writing their thesis narratives.”
A one-step process
The review will be conducted three weeks before the half-time seminar. The generated plagiarism report will be provided to the doctoral candidate and the chair of the review committee to be considered in the evaluation of the quality of the half-time report.
Doctoral candidates submit their half-time reports (in Word or PDF format) via https://sahlgrenskaacademy.wufoo.com/forms/plagiatgranskning-halvtid/
BY: ELIN LINDSTRÖM
Leave a Comment