This volume is the first book-length study on post-publication responses to academic plagiarism in humanities disciplines. It demonstrates that the correction of the scholarly literature for plagiarism is not a task for editors and publishers alone; each member of the research community has an indispensable role in maintaining the integrity of the published literature in the aftermath of plagiarism. If untreated, academic plagiarism damages the integrity of the scholarly record, corrupts the surrounding academic enterprise, and creates inefficiencies across all levels of knowledge production. By providing case studies from the field of philosophy and related disciplines, the volume exhibits that current post-publication responses to academic plagiarism are insufficient. It catalogues how humanities disciplines fall short in comparison with the natural and biomedical sciences for ensuring the integrity of the body of published research. This volume provides clarity about how to conceptualize the scholarly record, surveys the traditional methods for correcting it, and argues for new interventions to improve the reliability of the body of published research. The book is valuable not only to those in the field of philosophy and other humanities disciplines, but also to those interested in research ethics, meta-science, and the sociology of research.

Autorentext

M. V. Dougherty is the Sr. Ruth Caspar Chair in Philosophy at Ohio Dominican University (USA). He is author of Moral Dilemmas in Medieval Thought: From Gratian to Aquinas (Cambridge University Press, 2011) and has edited Aquinas's 'Disputed Questions on Evil': A Critical Guide (Cambridge University Press, 2016) and Pico della Mirandola: New Essays (Cambridge University Press, 2008). He has authored and co-authored articles on academic plagiarism, and his research interests include the history of ethics and research ethics. Since 2009, he has been involved in securing dozens of retractions, errata, and corrigenda for published articles in the discipline of philosophy and in related fields. His work in generating corrections for academic plagiarism and other authorship violations has been featured on Retraction Watch and on other academic news outlets.

Inhalt
Preface

IntroductionCorrecting the Scholarly Record
The Integrity of AuthorshipPre-Publication and Post-Publication Responses to PlagiarismThe Purpose of Academic PublishingA Précis of ChaptersReferences

1. Defining the Scholarly Record1.1 The Limits of the Scholarly Record1.1.1 The Knowledge Condition1.1.2 The Authorship Condition1.1.3 The Publication Condition1.1.4 The Library and the Database Conditions1.1.5 The Discipline Condition1.2 Works at the Margin of the Scholarly Record1.3 The Scholarly Record in Transition1.4 The Identity of Items of the Scholarly Record1.5 A Definable Scholarly RecordReferences
2. What is Academic Plagiarism?2.1 2.1. Identifying Academic Plagiarism2.1.1 Appropriation2.1.2 Non-Triviality2.1.3 Inadequate Credit2.1.4 An Appearance of Original Authorship2.1.5 A Discrete Item of the Scholarly Record2.2 The Intent to Plagiarize2.3 Self-Plagiarism2.4 Euphemisms for Academic Plagiarism2.5 Plagiarism vs. Copyright Infringement2.6 Statutes of Limitation for Plagiarism2.7 In SumReferences
3. A Test Case for Published Corrections: The Discipline of Philosophy3.1 Classifying Responses to Plagiarism3.2 Issuing a Statement of Concern3.3 Issuing a Statement of Retraction (SR)3.3.1 Maximal and Minimal Statements of Retraction3.3.2 Paywalled SRs and Untethered SRs3.3.3 SRs with University Support3.3.4 Academic Editors and Independent SRs3.3.5 Problems with Minimal and Medial SRs3.4 Reprinting a Volume After the Removal of Plagiarized Material3.5 Halting the Sale of the Plagiarized Material3.6 Taking No Public Action3.7 Conclusion3.7.1 Table 13.7.2 Table 23.7.3 Table 3References
4. Academic Whistleblowing4.1 The Whistleblowing Dilemma4.2 To Whom Can One Blow the Academic Whistle?4.2.1 Whistleblowing Directly to the Suspected Plagiarist4.2.2 Whistleblowing in a Post-Publication Review Venue4.2.3 Whistleblowing to a Journal or Volume Editor4.2.4 Whistleblowing to a Publisher4.2.5 Whistleblowing to a University Research Integrity Office4.2.6 Whistleblowing to a Grant Agency4.2.7 Whistleblowing to a Journalist or News Agency4.2.8 Whistleblowing to the Genuine Authors4.3 Multi-Targeted Whistleblowing4.4 How will the Whistleblowing Impact the Academic Whistleblower?4.5 What Might Whistleblower Harassment and Academic Witness Intimidation Look Like?4.5.1 The National Grant Agency4.5.2 Journal Editors4.5.3 Research Integrity Offices4.6 Conclusion4.7 Appendix: Sample Letters for Requesting Corrections of the Scholarly Record4.7.1 Sample of Letter Requesting a Retraction4.7.2 Sample of Letter Requesting a Corrigendum4.7.3 Sample of Letter Requesting a Clarification of AuthorshipReferences
5. Publishing Corrections of the Scholarly Record: Some Test Cases
   5.1 Disambiguating Retractions, Errata, and Corrigenda5.2 Case 1: Proceedings from the International Semiotics Institute5.3 Case 2: Subject Matters: A Journal of Communications and the Self5.4 Case 3: John Benjamins Publishing Company</div&g...