Understanding Self-Plagiarism: Is It Really a Problem?

Self-plagiarism, often referred to as “reuse of one’s own work,” occurs when an individual republishes or reuses significant portions of their previously created content without proper acknowledgment or permission. While traditional plagiarism involves copying someone else’s work, self-plagiarism entails presenting one’s past work as new or original. This can manifest in various forms, such as submitting the same paper to multiple journals, reusing old research in new publications, or incorporating parts of previous assignments into current projects without disclosure.

Though it might not seem unethical at first glance—after all, the content originates from the same author—self-plagiarism raises significant ethical, academic, and professional concerns. It can distort the perception of originality, mislead audiences, and inflate an author’s contribution to a field. In academia and publishing, self-plagiarism is viewed as a violation of integrity, undermining trust in scholarly and creative endeavors. Understanding self-plagiarism is essential to maintaining transparency, credibility, and respect for intellectual work.

What is Self-Plagiarism, and How does it differ from Traditional Plagiarism?

Self-plagiarism occurs when an individual reuses their previously published or submitted work, either in part or in its entirety, without proper acknowledgment or disclosure. It involves presenting old content as if it were new, original, or created for the current purpose. Common examples include resubmitting an academic paper to multiple institutions, recycling parts of a thesis into new research articles, or using text from prior work in a different context without citing it.

In contrast, traditional plagiarism involves copying or closely imitating someone else’s work, ideas, or intellectual property and presenting it as one’s own, often without proper credit or authorization. Traditional plagiarism violates the principle of giving due credit to the original author, whereas self-plagiarism primarily breaches ethical norms related to originality and transparency.

The key distinction lies in the source of the material:

• Traditional plagiarism steals from others.
• Self-plagiarism misrepresents one’s own past work as fresh and novel.

While both forms of plagiarism undermine trust and integrity, self-plagiarism uniquely challenges ethical norms within academic, creative, and professional settings by misleading audiences about the originality and effort involved in the work.

Why Is Reusing Your Own Work Considered Unethical in Certain Contexts?

Reusing your own work, often referred to as self-plagiarism, is considered unethical in certain contexts because it undermines core principles of originality, transparency, and fairness. Originality is a fundamental expectation in academic, creative, and professional fields, where individuals are tasked with producing fresh ideas or content for each new endeavor. When someone reuses their previous work without acknowledgment, it misleads others into believing the material is new, violating the trust placed in the creator and compromising the integrity of the work.

Self-plagiarism is particularly problematic in academic and publishing contexts because it distorts the body of knowledge. For instance, submitting the same research findings to multiple journals can create redundancy, making it harder for other researchers to discern what is genuinely new or valuable. This practice also inflates an individual’s perceived contributions, granting an unfair advantage in competitive environments where recognition is based on originality and effort. Similarly, resubmitting an old assignment denies the opportunity for genuine learning and growth in educational settings.

Additionally, reusing one’s work can breach ethical guidelines established by institutions and organizations, leading to consequences such as retractions, penalties, or reputational harm. It can also raise legal issues in cases where the original work is under copyright. Even if the author owns the content, publishing agreements often transfer copyright to publishers, requiring permission for reuse. Failure to acknowledge these agreements can result in legal disputes and tarnish professional credibility.

The unethical nature of self-plagiarism lies in its potential to mislead, distort progress, and erode trust. While there may be contexts where reusing one’s work is acceptable—such as with explicit acknowledgment or when building upon prior research—transparency is key. By clearly disclosing the reuse of content and ensuring it meets ethical and contextual standards, individuals can maintain the integrity of their contributions and respect the expectations of their audience or field.

Consequences of Self-Plagiarism in Academic Research and Publishing

Self-plagiarism, or the act of reusing one’s own previously published work without proper disclosure, is a significant ethical issue in academic research and publishing. Unlike traditional plagiarism, where one uses another person’s work without acknowledgment, self-plagiarism involves the misrepresentation of one’s past work as new. This practice, whether intentional or not, can lead to a range of consequences that affect the individual researcher, the academic community, and the integrity of the field.

1. Reputational Damage: A researcher’s reputation is built on trust, originality, and adherence to ethical standards. Self-plagiarism undermines these principles, often resulting in reputational harm. When discovered, it signals a lack of transparency and ethical rigor, leading peers, institutions, and publishers to question the researcher’s integrity. This loss of credibility can have long-term effects on professional relationships and career opportunities.
2. Retraction of Published Work: In the world of academic publishing, originality is paramount. Journals and publishers have strict policies against duplicating content. If self-plagiarism is detected after publication, it often results in the retraction of the work. Retractions are publicly recorded, permanently marking the author’s academic record. This diminishes the author’s credibility and affects their standing in the academic community.
3. Legal and Copyright Issues: When an author publishes an article, the copyright is often transferred to the publisher. Reusing substantial portions of this work in subsequent publications without proper citation or permission can lead to copyright violations. Such actions can have legal consequences, including potential lawsuits, fines, or bans from publishing with certain journals or organizations.
4. Institutional Penalties: Academic institutions hold researchers and students to high standards of integrity. Self-plagiarism violates these standards and can lead to institutional investigations and disciplinary action. Consequences may range from formal warnings to more severe actions, such as suspension, loss of research funding, or even termination of employment in extreme cases. Students found guilty of self-plagiarism may face grade penalties, academic probation, or expulsion.
5. Inflated Academic Contributions: One of the significant consequences of self-plagiarism is the artificial inflation of an author’s academic output. Researchers can create the false impression of greater productivity or impact by presenting the same work as new in multiple publications. This misleads peers and funders and undermines the fair evaluation of contributions within the field.
6. Distortion of the Academic Record: Self-plagiarism introduces redundancy into the body of academic literature. This can confuse readers and researchers who rely on published works to guide their studies. For instance, duplicated findings may be interpreted as independent validations of a theory, leading to skewed perceptions of consensus and influencing subsequent research in misguided directions.
7. Undermining the Integrity of the Field: The integrity of academic research depends on originality, transparency, and the pursuit of new knowledge. Self-plagiarism undermines these values, eroding the trust that the academic community places in published work. It creates unnecessary clutter in the literature, diluting the value of genuinely original contributions and potentially hindering progress in the field.
8. Loss of Professional Opportunities: A researcher caught in self-plagiarism scandals may face exclusion from publishing in reputable journals, participating in academic conferences, or collaborating with peers. These consequences can limit the individual’s ability to share future findings and hinder their career development.

Self-plagiarism is more than just a technical violation of publishing rules; it is a breach of ethical principles that guide academic research. The consequences of self-plagiarism—ranging from reputational harm to institutional penalties and legal issues—underscore the importance of transparency and originality in scholarly work.

Researchers must take steps to avoid self-plagiarism, such as properly citing their previous work, seeking permissions where necessary, and adhering to ethical guidelines set by their institutions and publishers. By doing so, they not only protect their reputation but also uphold the integrity of the academic community and contribute meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge.

How Does Self-Plagiarism Violate Academic Integrity Policies?

Self-plagiarism violates academic integrity policies because it breaches the fundamental principles of honesty, originality, and transparency. Academic integrity requires that every piece of submitted or published work represents a new and original contribution. Self-plagiarism, however, involves reusing one’s own previously completed or published work without proper acknowledgment, misrepresenting it as new. This misrepresentation undermines the trust that educators, peers, and the broader academic community place in an individual’s contributions. It also compromises the accuracy of assessments meant to gauge a student’s or researcher’s progress and understanding.

Transparency is another cornerstone of academic integrity. Individuals conceal the full extent of their intellectual contribution by failing to disclose that portions of a work are derived from previous efforts. This lack of openness misleads those evaluating or relying on the work, whether it be instructors grading assignments or researchers building upon published studies. Such concealment directly conflicts with institutional and publishing policies that demand full disclosure of overlapping content.

Self-plagiarism also creates an unfair advantage. By reusing past work, individuals save time and effort compared to their peers who produce original content for each assignment or project. This undermines the fairness of academic and professional evaluations, where rewards are based on the assumption of equal effort. In publishing, duplicating content inflates an author’s perceived productivity, potentially skewing funding, promotions, or recognition. Moreover, self-plagiarism can distort the academic record. Reusing research findings across multiple publications introduces redundancy, misleading readers and researchers into believing there is broader validation of a hypothesis than actually exists. This clutter in the academic literature wastes resources and hinders the advancement of genuine knowledge.

How Can Self-Plagiarism Affect Credibility and Trust in a Professional Setting?

Self-plagiarism can significantly harm credibility and trust in a professional setting by undermining the principles of originality, transparency, and ethical conduct that are fundamental to professional relationships. Reusing their previous work without proper acknowledgment creates a false impression of effort and novelty, misleading colleagues, clients, or employers. This act of misrepresentation can lead others to question the individual’s honesty and integrity, damaging their professional reputation and the trust they have built within their field.

In organizations where ethical behavior is highly valued, self-plagiarism can be perceived as cutting corners or attempting to inflate one’s contributions unfairly. For example, reusing reports, presentations, or research findings without disclosure can be seen as a lack of initiative or innovation, signaling to peers and superiors that the individual may not be as reliable or creative as initially perceived. This breach of ethical standards can strain relationships with colleagues and erode confidence in the individual’s future work.

The consequences of self-plagiarism often extend beyond the individual. In team-based environments, it can lead to a breakdown of trust among collaborators, as others may feel their efforts are being devalued. Additionally, if the self-plagiarism becomes publicly known, it can tarnish the reputation of the organization associated with the individual, potentially leading to lost business opportunities or diminished public trust.

Why Is It Important to Disclose When Reusing Your Previous Work?

Disclosing the reuse of your previous work is crucial for maintaining transparency, trust, and ethical standards in academic, professional, and creative environments. Failing to do so can lead to misunderstandings, breaches of ethical guidelines, and potential damage to your reputation. Here’s why proper disclosure is essential:

• Upholding Transparency and Honesty: Transparency is a cornerstone of ethical conduct. Disclosing the reuse of your prior work ensures that your audience—whether it’s educators, employers, colleagues, or clients—fully understands the origins and scope of the content. You foster trust and honesty by clearly stating what portions of the work are reused and what is new. This clarity helps to avoid any misrepresentation of effort or originality, preserving the integrity of your contributions.
• Maintaining Ethical Standards: Most academic institutions, publishing houses, and professional organizations have clear guidelines regarding self-plagiarism. These guidelines require individuals to disclose any overlap with previously submitted or published work. Failing to comply with these rules risks breaching institutional policies and undermines the field’s ethical standards. Disclosure demonstrates respect for these standards and ensures that your work adheres to academic and professional integrity principles.
• Preventing Misrepresentation of Effort: When previous work is presented as entirely new, it can give a false impression of the time, effort, and creativity invested. For example, in an academic setting, resubmitting an old essay for a new assignment might lead instructors to believe you’ve engaged with new material or ideas when you haven’t. Similarly, in a workplace context, reusing past reports or presentations without acknowledgment may mislead colleagues or clients about your productivity. By disclosing reused work, you ensure that all evaluations are based on accurate representations of your contributions.
• Avoiding Redundancy in Knowledge: In research and publishing, reusing work without disclosure can contribute to redundancy in the academic or professional record. Repeated publications of the same findings or ideas clutter the body of knowledge, making it harder for others to discern truly original contributions. Disclosure allows readers and reviewers to better understand how your current work builds upon past efforts, ensuring that your contributions add value rather than duplication.
• Ensuring Legal and Copyright Compliance: When a piece of work has been previously published, it is often protected by copyright agreements. Reusing substantial portions of that work without proper acknowledgment can violate these agreements, leading to potential legal consequences. Even if you are the original author, failing to disclose the reuse of copyrighted material can strain relationships with publishers and damage your professional reputation. Disclosure helps you stay compliant with copyright laws and protects you from potential disputes.
• Preserving Trust and Relationships: Trust is vital to professional and academic relationships. When others discover that reused work has not been disclosed, it can erode their confidence in your integrity. This loss of trust can affect collaborative opportunities, future partnerships, and your standing within your field. Openly acknowledging reused work signals a commitment to ethical practices and fosters positive, trustworthy relationships with peers, colleagues, and stakeholders.
• Enhancing Credibility: Disclosure enhances the credibility of your work. By openly acknowledging reused material, you show that you have nothing to hide and are committed to ethical transparency. This openness builds confidence among your audience, whether it’s readers, reviewers, or collaborators, and ensures that your contributions are valued for their authenticity and integrity.
• Supporting a Culture of Integrity: By disclosing the reuse of your previous work, you contribute to a broader culture of integrity in academia and professional settings. Your actions set an example for others, encouraging transparency and ethical responsibility within your community. This cultural reinforcement is essential for sustaining long-term progress and innovation in fields that depend on trust and collaboration.

Disclosing when you reuse your previous work is not just a matter of following rules; it is an ethical obligation that reflects your commitment to transparency, integrity, and fairness. Whether in academic, professional, or creative contexts, proper acknowledgment of reused work ensures accurate evaluation, prevents legal or ethical issues, and builds trust with your audience. By openly disclosing the origins of your content, you protect your reputation, strengthen professional relationships, and contribute to a culture that values honesty and innovation. Ultimately, disclosure is a simple yet powerful practice that upholds the integrity of your work and the trust of those who rely on it.

Are There Any Exceptions Where Self-Plagiarism Might Be Permissible or Justified?

Self-plagiarism, while generally discouraged, can be permissible or justified in certain contexts when handled transparently and ethically. One common exception is when building upon previous research or creative work. In academia, for instance, researchers may reuse portions of their earlier publications—such as literature reviews, methodologies, or background information—when contributing to ongoing studies or presenting updated findings. This reuse is acceptable as long as the earlier work is properly cited and the new publication adds substantial value or insights to the field.

Another instance where self-plagiarism might be justified is when revising and updating previously published material. Authors often expand on earlier work to reflect new developments or provide a more comprehensive analysis. For example, a conference paper might later form the basis of a detailed journal article. In such cases, transparency and acknowledgment are crucial to ensure readers understand the progression of the work.

Certain professional and technical contexts also allow for justified reuse. For instance, in industries like law, medicine, or engineering, standardized content such as safety protocols, procedural descriptions, or disclaimers may be repeated across documents to ensure clarity and consistency. This practice is widely accepted as long as the repetition serves a functional purpose and does not mislead the audience about originality.

Educational settings may also permit self-plagiarism under specific circumstances, such as when students work on cumulative projects that build upon previous assignments. However, explicit approval from instructors and clear disclosure of reused content is essential to maintain academic integrity. Similarly, in creative industries, artists and writers may adapt earlier works for new projects or campaigns, provided that the intent and reuse align with industry norms and expectations.

While there are exceptions to the prohibition of self-plagiarism, transparency and ethical consideration are key. Proper citation, acknowledgment, and adherence to relevant guidelines ensure that reused work does not mislead or undermine the trust of the audience. Maintaining these standards allows individuals to navigate the fine line between justified reuse and unethical duplication.

What Steps Can Individuals Take to Avoid Self-Plagiarism?

Self-plagiarism, while less commonly discussed than traditional plagiarism, poses a significant ethical concern in academic, professional, and creative fields. It involves reusing one’s own previously submitted or published work without proper acknowledgment or permission. While the content originates from the same author, presenting it as new can mislead readers, evaluators, or employers and violate institutional or professional guidelines. To maintain ethical standards and ensure originality, individuals can take the following steps to avoid self-plagiarism.

1. Understand What Constitutes Self-Plagiarism: The first step in avoiding self-plagiarism is understanding what it means and recognizing its implications. Self-plagiarism isn’t just about copying and pasting; it includes reusing ideas, data, or text from previous work without proper acknowledgment. Familiarize yourself with institutional and industry-specific guidelines regarding self-plagiarism to ensure compliance with ethical standards.
2. Maintain a Record of Previous Work: Keeping an organized record of all your past submissions, publications, and projects is crucial. Whether you’re a student working on assignments or a researcher publishing studies, maintaining detailed records helps you avoid accidental duplication. Clearly label each document with its submission date, context, and purpose so you can reference and acknowledge it appropriately if needed.
3. Always Provide Proper Citations: If you must reuse material from your own previous work, cite it just as you would when referencing another author’s work. Proper citations acknowledge the original source and ensure transparency. For example, if you’re building on an earlier study, cite it explicitly in the introduction or methodology of your new work. This practice not only avoids ethical breaches but also allows readers to trace the evolution of your ideas.
4. Paraphrase and Add New Value: Reusing your own work becomes problematic when it adds no new value. Instead of simply copying text, focus on rephrasing and expanding on your previous ideas to create fresh content. For example, if you’re revisiting a previously written report, include updated data, new perspectives, or additional analysis. This approach ensures that your work remains original while building upon earlier contributions.
5. Seek Permission When Necessary: If your previous work has been published, it may be protected by copyright laws. Reusing substantial portions without the publisher’s consent could lead to legal issues in such cases. Before reusing the material, seek permission from the publisher or review the terms of your publishing agreement. Many publishers allow authors to reuse their work in certain contexts as long as they provide proper attribution.
6. Communicate with Supervisors or Editors: When in doubt, seek guidance from supervisors, instructors, or editors. Open communication ensures that you understand the expectations and ethical considerations for reusing previous work. For example, if you’re a student considering incorporating parts of a previous assignment into a thesis, your instructor can advise on how to do so ethically.
7. Use Plagiarism Detection Tools: Plagiarism detection tools are not just for identifying copied content from others; they can also help detect overlaps with your own prior work. Tools like Turnitin or iThenticate can flag sections that resemble previously submitted or published material, giving you an opportunity to revise and ensure originality before submission.
8. Tailor Work to the Specific Context: Each assignment, publication, or project has unique objectives and audiences. Tailoring your work to meet the specific requirements of each context ensures that it is fresh and relevant. Avoid wholesale recycling content; adapt your ideas and findings to fit the new purpose.
9. Obtain Prior Approval for Educational Reuse: Students may sometimes wish to reuse portions of earlier work for new assignments or projects in academic settings. This is permissible only with explicit approval from the instructor. Be transparent about the extent of the reuse and ensure that the reused material contributes meaningfully to the new submission.
10. Commit to Ethical Practices: Ultimately, avoiding self-plagiarism comes down to a commitment to ethical conduct. Strive to produce original work for each task or project, and when referencing past work, prioritize transparency and acknowledgment. By maintaining high ethical standards, you avoid self-plagiarism and enhance your credibility and reputation.

Avoiding self-plagiarism requires awareness, diligence, and a commitment to transparency. By understanding the guidelines, properly citing reused material, and ensuring that each new project adds fresh value, individuals can maintain ethical integrity and uphold the trust of their academic or professional communities. These steps prevent potential ethical violations and foster a culture of originality and respect in scholarly and professional endeavors.

Can Self-Plagiarism Lead to Copyright Infringement if Previous Work Is Published?

Self-plagiarism can indeed lead to copyright infringement if the previous work has been published and the copyright for that work is held by a publisher or another entity. When authors publish their work, they often sign agreements that transfer copyright ownership to the publisher. This means that while the author retains moral authorship rights, the legal rights to reproduce, distribute, or adapt the content are no longer solely theirs. If an author later reuses portions of that work—such as text, data, or figures—without permission or proper acknowledgment, they may be infringing on the publisher’s rights, even if they are the original creator.

Copyright law protects the expression of ideas rather than the ideas themselves, which means that reusing exact phrases, passages, or visual content from a previously published work without authorization or citation could violate copyright agreements. For instance, including large sections of a previously published journal article in a new book or article without obtaining permission could constitute infringement. This is particularly problematic in academic publishing, where publishers often retain strict control over the reuse of published material.

The consequences of such copyright infringement can be significant. Publishers may take legal action, impose fines, or retract the new publication. Additionally, the author’s professional reputation could suffer, as instances of copyright infringement are taken seriously in both academic and professional communities. To avoid these risks, authors should review the copyright agreements for their previously published work, request permission from the publisher when necessary, and ensure proper attribution when reusing material. By taking these steps, authors can navigate the complexities of self-plagiarism and copyright law while maintaining ethical and legal standards.

What Are the Legal Implications of Self-Plagiarism in Publishing?

The legal implications of self-plagiarism in publishing primarily revolve around copyright infringement and breaches of publishing agreements. When an author publishes a work, they often transfer the copyright to the publisher, granting the publisher exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and adapt the material. If the author later reuses portions of that work in a new publication without the publisher’s consent, it may constitute copyright infringement, even though the content originates from the same author. This is because copyright law protects the expression of ideas rather than the ideas themselves, and reusing exact text, data, or figures without authorization can violate the publisher’s rights.

Self-plagiarism can also breach publishing agreements, which typically include clauses requiring submitted works to be original and not previously published. Failing to disclose reused material misrepresents the work as entirely new, violating the terms of the agreement. This can lead to legal consequences such as retraction of the publication, monetary penalties, or exclusion from future opportunities with the publisher. Additionally, if self-plagiarism results in dual publication or submission of the same content to multiple outlets, it may cause conflicts over ownership and licensing, leading to costly disputes and reputational damage.

In collaborative works, self-plagiarism can create further legal complications if one author reuses content from a shared project without the consent of co-authors. This could result in claims of misrepresentation or unauthorized use of intellectual property, potentially escalating into legal action. To avoid these legal implications, authors should carefully review their copyright agreements, seek permission before reusing previously published material, and always provide proper acknowledgment. Reframing or expanding on prior work rather than directly copying it can help ensure originality while adding value to the new publication.

How Does Self-Plagiarism Undermine the Value of Original Work and Innovation?

Self-plagiarism undermines the value of original work and innovation by distorting the perception of novelty and misrepresenting the effort involved in intellectual contributions. Originality is a fundamental principle in academia, creative industries, and professional settings, where each new piece of work is expected to bring fresh perspectives or insights. When an individual reuse their own previously published or submitted work without proper acknowledgment, they present it as new, misleading readers, peers, or evaluators. This misrepresentation devalues authentic efforts and creates a false sense of progress.

In addition to misrepresentation, self-plagiarism stifles innovation by recycling existing ideas rather than generating new ones. True innovation relies on the introduction of novel concepts, theories, or solutions that push boundaries and contribute to the advancement of a field. Reusing old material adds redundancy to the body of knowledge, creating clutter and making it harder for others to discern genuinely groundbreaking work. This duplication of content can slow the pace of progress by diverting attention from original contributions that deserve recognition and further exploration.

The practice of self-plagiarism also erodes trust in the intellectual and creative ecosystem. Audiences, collaborators, and institutions rely on transparency and honesty in scholarly and professional work. When self-plagiarism becomes apparent, it raises doubts about the authenticity and integrity of the author’s other contributions, leading to a broader skepticism about the value of published or shared work. This mistrust can harm the credibility of entire disciplines, as it diminishes confidence in the originality and reliability of knowledge production.

Moreover, self-plagiarism devalues the significant effort required to produce truly original work. While genuine contributions often involve extensive research, creativity, and problem-solving, self-plagiarism shortcuts this process, creating an unfair advantage for those who reuse their own material. This undermines the recognition and rewards that should be reserved for individuals who invest time and resources into generating new ideas, further discouraging innovation and ethical practices.

In essence, self-plagiarism diminishes the integrity of intellectual and creative endeavors by promoting redundancy, stifling originality, and eroding trust. Upholding transparency and prioritizing fresh contributions are essential to preserving the value of original work and fostering an environment where innovation can thrive.

Reference Articles:

1. A Fragile Trust | Jayson Blair Plagiarism Scandal | Independent Lens | PBS. (n.d.). Independent Lens. Retrieved December 12, 2024, from https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/documentaries/fragile-trust/
2. Arumugam, A., & Aldhafiri, F. K. (2016). A researcher’s ethical dilemma: Is self-plagiarism a condemnable practice or not? Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 32(6), 427–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2016.1185894
3. Bruton, S. V. (2014). Self-Plagiarism and Textual Recycling: Legitimate Forms of Research Misconduct. Accountability in Research, 21(3), 176–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.848071
4. Burdine, L. K., de Castro Maymone, M. B., & Vashi, N. A. (2019). Text recycling: Self-plagiarism in scientific writing. International Journal of Women’s Dermatology, 5(2), 134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijwd.2018.10.002
5. Chien Chou, & Jui-An Pan, S. (2020). Self-plagiarism in Academic Writing: Concepts, Cases, Regulations, and Best Practices. Journal of Library & Information Studies, 18(2), 43–72. https://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.202012_18(2).043
6. Diane, P. (2013). Teaching To Avoid Plagiarism: How To Promote Good Source Use: How to Promote Good Source Use. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
7. Disgraced journalist Jayson Blair apologizes for plagiarism that ‘damaged the profession.’ (2016, April 7). WRIC ABC 8News. https://www.wric.com/news/disgraced-journalist-jayson-blair-apologizes-for-plagiarism-that-damaged-the-profession/
8. Eaton, S. E., & Crossman, K. (2018). Self-Plagiarism Research Literature in the Social Sciences: A Scoping Review. Interchange, 49(3), 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-018-9333-6
9. Green, L. (2005). Reviewing the Scourge of Self-Plagiarism. M/C Journal, 8(5), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2426
10. How was Pepsi not sued for plagiarizing Coca Cola? (n.d.). Quora. Retrieved December 12, 2024, from https://www.quora.com/How-was-Pepsi-not-sued-for-plagiarizing-Coca-Cola
11. LaFollette, M. C. (1992). Stealing Into Print: Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing. University of California Press.
12. Lin, W.-Y. C. (2020). Self-plagiarism in academic journal articles: From the perspectives of international editors-in-chief in editorial and COPE case. Scientometrics, 123(1), 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03373-0
13. Martin, D. E., Rao, A., & Sloan, L. R. (2009). Plagiarism, Integrity, and Workplace Deviance: A Criterion Study. Ethics & Behavior, 19(1), 36–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420802623666
14. Masic, I. (2012). PLAGIARISM IN SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING. Acta Informatica Medica, 20(4), 208–213. https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2012.20.208-213
15. Ożegalska-Trybalska, J. (2021). Plagiarism and self-plagiarism – facts and myths. Nowotwory. Journal of Oncology, 71(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.5603/NJO.2021.0012
16. Roig, M. (2010). Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: What every author should know. Biochemia Medica, 20(3), 295–300.
17. Roig, M. (2012). Avoiding unethical writing practices. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 50(10), 3385–3387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2012.06.043
18. Samuelson, P. (1994). Self-plagiarism or fair use. Communications of the ACM, 37(8), 21–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/179606.179731
19. Sharifirad, G., Shahnazi, H., Kamran, A., & Abbasi, M. H. (2013). Plagiarism: Self-Plagiarism. Journal of Health System Research, 8(6), 922–928.
20. Strangfeld, J. A. (2019). I Just Don’t Want to Be Judged: Cultural Capital’s Impact on Student Plagiarism. Sage Open, 9(1), 2158244018822382. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018822382
21. White, S. M. (2011). Self-plagiarism. Anaesthesia, 66(3), 220–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.2011.06645.x