Thumbnail Image
Publication

Using plagiarism detection software : the other side of the coin

Eck, Nadine
Author(s)
Eck, Nadine
Author(s) (Additional)
Illustrator(s)
Producer(s)
Contributor(s)
Contributor(s) (Other)
Editor(s)
Advisor(s)
Contact(s)
Data Collector(s)
Keywords
anti-plagiarism software
academic fraud
evaluation
urkund (software)
compilatio (software)
Institut International de Recherche et d’Action sur la Fraude et le Plagiat Académiques (IRAFPA)
GE Subjects
Research ethics
Cheating and plagiarism
Collections
Research Ethics Series
Show all metadata
Files
Thumbnail Image
GE_Research_Ethics_2_Ch18.pdf
Adobe PDF, 329.02 KB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12424/4273122
Online Access
Abstract
The conclusions of this article are the result of a study conducted over three years, based on the expertise files that the author established as a scientific collaborator of the current IRAFPA. The use of similarity detection software was systematic for each case. The aim of this article is to demonstrate the absurdity of a persistent belief in universities: that it would be sufficient to call on the services of a computer services company specialising in so-called "anti-plagiarism" software to curb such cases. We will show, by example, what can and cannot be expected of them, and then we will compare the two most widespread in France, Urkund and Compilatio.
Note(s)
Topic
Type
Book chapter
Date
2023
Identifier
ISBN
9782889315178
DOI
10.58863/20.500.12424/4273122
Copyright/License
Globethics Publications
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Embedded videos