Identifying Plagiarism - Assignment Example

Running head: Identifying Plagiarism Identified Plagiarism SBSF 8100 Dr. Jeffrey Zuckerman October 21, Identifying Plagiarism Due to the advanced use of the Web, many people are now able to identify plagiarism. Technological advancement has also contributed in detecting incidences of copying and pasting other than writing on one’s own word. The use of Google-Plus-Four method for example, has facilitated in the identification of work, similar to that in the database. The technology compares a four-word phrase with a similar phrase in the database to determine if there is a correlation. On the other hand, people can find similar work in the online paper mills. These mills contain free papers, which were done by other students. If the paper in question corresponds to one in the mills, it is important to scrutinize its content to determine if there is plagiarism or not. Equally, teachers can employ the use of software such as turnitin that detect any form of plagiarism. Such software seeks word match between two papers, one in the database and the other one belonging to the student (Harris, 2001). However, there are manual ways of detecting plagiarism depending of the way writers have presented their work. By analyzing the plagiarized passage below, the paper will pinpoint incidences of plagiarism and offer remedies for the same. The first plagiarized portion of the passage is the second sentence. The author paraphrases and writes, ‘if we treat people as if they have knowledge that they do not have, we can cause miscommunication and perhaps embarrassment’. The wording of the phrase is wrong as the author uses the same words as used in the original passage, without crediting the source. Proper paraphrasing of the sentence would have been as follows. “It is most likely that treating people with the assumption they have knowledge they do not possess, leads to miscommunication and sometimes embarrassment” (Nickerson, 1999, p. 737). This shows that the ideas are borrowed from somewhere else (Case Study, 2011). The student has also plagiarized the third sentence in passage, which is presented as follows. ‘Conversely, it is important not to convey to others information that we can assume they already have’. First, the student uses the same wording as used in the original passage. This indicates that the student uses the ideas of the author as owns. In addition, original passage clearly indicates whose views these are, and this is not reflected in the paraphrased passage. Correct paraphrase of the sentence would have been like this. According to Gice as cited in Nickerson (1999), “a fundamental rule of conversation is that one generally does not convey to others information that one can assume they already have” .This paraphrase, although using the same wording as those in the original passage gives credit to the author by directly quoting what was said (Case Study, 2011). The fourth sentence is also plagiarized, as the write only copied and passed what the original author had written. The student presents the sentence as ‘A speaker overestimating what his or her listeners already know may be talking over their heads, and a speaker who underestimates their knowledge may be perceived as talking down to them’. This statement is similar to that in the original passage, although the student is required to paraphrase it or cite the author. A correct paraphrase for this sentence would be as follows. ‘Speakers who overrate their listeners’ knowledge may talk without being understood, while those underrating their listeners’ knowledge may be construed as demeaning them’. The reason why this sentence is not cited is that, the writer borrows ideas for writing the subsequent sentence from the same author (Case Study, 2011). Benito wrote: The student presents the sentence as ‘A speaker overestimating what his or her listeners already know may be talking over their heads, and a speaker who underestimates their knowledge may be perceived as talking down to them’. This statement is similar to that in the original passage, although the student is required to paraphrase it or cite the author. Paraphrased sentence: A correct phrase for this sentence would be as follows, ‘Speakers who overrate their listeners’ knowledge may talk without being understood, while those underrating their listeners’ knowledge may be construed as demeaning them’. The reason why this sentence is not cited is that, the writer borrows ideas for writing the subsequent sentence from the same author (Case Study, 2011). The writer also plagiarizes the last sentence for not giving due credit to the original author. True. Although the writer tries to give the source of the materials, they do not correspond to the actual source where the passage originated. Wrong citation of referencing also constitutes plagiarism, which is easily identifiable. In addition, the referencing is not consistent with the one stipulated by the supervisor, which is the APA format. Both types of misjudgment work against effective and efficient communication (Nickerson, 1999, p. 737). A correct paraphrase for the last sentence would be as follows; These misunderstandings usually impede efficiency and effectiveness in communication (Nickerson, 1999, p. 737). Proper referencing enables the readers to link the reference list with the citation in order to trace the source of the information (Case Study, 2011). Original we read: To communicate effectively with other people, one must have a reasonably accurate idea of what they do and do not know that is pertinent to the communication. Treating people as though they have knowledge they do not have can result in miscommunication and perhaps embarrassment. On the other hand, a fundamental rule of conversation, at least according to a Gricean view, is that one generally does not convey to others information that one can assume they already have (Gice, 1975). A speaker who overestimates what his or her listeners know may talk over their heads; one who underestimates their knowledge may, in the interest of being clear, be perceived as talking down to them. Both types of misjudgment work against effective and efficient communication (Nickerson, 1999, p. 737). Student’s version As Raymond Nickerson (1999) reminds us, “To communicate effectively with other people, one must have a reasonably accurate idea of what they do and do not know that is pertinent to the communication” (p. 737). If we treat people as if they have knowledge that they do not have, we can cause miscommunication and perhaps embarrassment. Conversely, it is important not to convey to others information that we can assume they already have. A speaker overestimating what his or her listeners already know may be talking over their heads, and a speaker who underestimates their knowledge may be perceived as talking down to them. Both of these wrong estimations work against effective and efficient communication. Benito’s version with direct quotes and true paraphrases: Nickerson (1999) wrote that effective communication entails having a prior understanding of the extent of people’s knowledge regarding the information being communicated. It is advisable to ensure that we deal with people based on the knowledge that they possess, since failure to do this may lead to misunderstandings or awkward situations. At the same time, it is essential not to pass on information that is presumed to have been previously communicated. Speakers who overrate their listeners’ knowledge may talk without being understood, while those underrating their listeners’ knowledge may be construed as demeaning them. These misunderstandings usually impede efficiency and effectiveness in communication (Nickerson, 1999, p. 737). References Case Study. (2011). Identifying Plagiarism . Case Study , 1. Harris, R. A. (2001). The Plagiarism Handbook: Strategies for Preventing, Detecting, and Dealing with Plagiarism. Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing. Read More