1 / 14

Quality Assurance Plagiarism – Cross Check

Quality Assurance Plagiarism – Cross Check. MOC/TOC Workshop 11 October 2013 Greg Byrd – Plagiarism Chair Jennifer Carruth – Quality Assurance Manager. CrossCheck in ScholarOne Manuscripts. CrossCheck became available in S1M in early 2009 on a paper by paper manual upload basis only

rock
Download Presentation

Quality Assurance Plagiarism – Cross Check

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality AssurancePlagiarism – Cross Check MOC/TOC Workshop 11 October 2013 Greg Byrd – Plagiarism Chair Jennifer Carruth – Quality Assurance Manager

  2. CrossCheck in ScholarOne Manuscripts • CrossCheck became available in S1M in early 2009 on a paper by paper manual upload basis only • February 2013 CrossCheck automatically run on every S1M paper upon submission. Jennifer following up on any papers with overlap over 30% • June 2013 IPR office taking over EIC assistance on CC reports from Jennifer as they have added staff

  3. Plagiarism Case Breakdown • Cases Received2009 – 322010 – 582011 – 44 2012 – 34 2013 – 59 YTD – Growth due to CC in S1M

  4. 2013 Case Load • 66 Cases worked on in 2013 • 7 received in 2012 • 59 received in 2013 • 46 open cases (all received in 2013) • 20 closed YTD 2013

  5. 2013 Received Cases Breakdown • 21 Outside papers plagiarizing Transactions • 0 Outside papers plagiarizing Magazines • 3 Outside papers plagiarizing CS conferences • 18 Found at submission for Transactions • 9 Found at submission for Magazines • 8 CS financially sponsored conference • 0 CS Technically sponsored conference • 0 CPS Non-sponsored conference

  6. Decision Breakdown • 2013 Decisions (delay due to back up at IPR with startup of CrossCheck in S1M) • 1 Dismissed • 0 Author Misconduct (not plagiarism) • 4 Level 5 Plagiarism • 1 Level 4 Plagiarism • 5 Level 3 Plagiarism • 4 Level 2 Plagiarism • 5 Level 1 Plagiarism CS QA MOC/TOC Workshop

  7. Plagiarism by Country

  8. What EIC Will Recieve • CC report available in every paper record • Email report sent if overlap over 30% • IPR office staff will contact you if high enough to need investigation

  9. Investigation Needed?When overlap is below 40% • Is this reuse of author own material? If properly referenced, original paper and summary of differences received, move forward as usual • Overlap with other author materials? Is proper referencing and quotation used? If so, move forward as usual. Administratively reject if needed.

  10. Investigation Needed?When overlap is over 40% • Is this reuse of author own material? If properly referenced, original paper and summary of differences received, move forward as usual making sure that there is enough new materials • Overlap with other author materials? The IEEE IPR office should be contacting you. Contact Jennifer if you do not hear from them. Do not administratively reject. Investigation most likely needed.

  11. Plagiarism Under Investigation • Notify Allen Press Admin to flag paper as “under investigation” in S1M • Send all information to Jennifer at jcarruth@computer.org including • S1M log number • Copy of original paper if possible • Information of who found plagiarism – EIC, AE, Reviewer – if reviewer please provide name and email • Explanation of what overlap has been found

  12. What to Expect During Investigation • EIC will be asked to appoint a committee of at least 2 people – EIC may act as a member of the committee • Jennifer will request a summary report and marked papers from IEEE IPR office and a response from all accused authors. • When accused response and summary report have been received Jennifer will send all case files to EIC/Committee • EIC/Committee will decide if they concur with the IPR summary report and recommended decision. If not in agreement: suggest new decision and penalty with explanation • VP of Pubs and Plagiarism Chair are asked to concur on EIC/Committee decision • All Level 1 and 2 misconduct and any case with an author ban is sent to VP of IEEE PSPB for approval • Plagiarism Chair sends all decisions to accused authors

  13. Levels of Plagiarismhttp://www.ieee.org/documents/Level_description.pdf • 1) Uncredited Verbatim Copying of a Full Paper, a Major Portion (more than 50%) within a Single Paper, or More than a Single Paper by the Same Author(s) • 2) Uncredited Verbatim Copying of a Large Portion (greater than 20% and up to 50%) within a Paper.Uncredited Verbatim Copying within More than One Paper by the Same Author(s) • 3) Uncredited Verbatim Copying of Individual Elements (Paragraph(s), Sentence(s), Illustration(s), etc.) Resulting in a Significant Portion (up to 20%) within a Paper • 4) Uncredited Improper Paraphrasing of Pages or Paragraphs • 5) Credited Verbatim Copying of a Major Portion of a Paper without Clear Delineation

  14. Thank you for your attention! • Questions? Jennifer Carruth jcarruth@computer.org

More Related