WEBVTT - Why Do People Plagiarize? 0:00:01.920 --> 0:00:06.560 Welcome to brain Stuff, production of I Heart Radio. Hey 0:00:06.600 --> 0:00:10.119 brain Stuff. Lauren Vogelbaum here, a reporter at The New 0:00:10.200 --> 0:00:13.360 York Times, a U S senator running for president, a 0:00:13.440 --> 0:00:17.520 first lady, a revered country music star, a civil rights icon, 0:00:18.160 --> 0:00:20.560 each of them, along with thousands of students every year, 0:00:20.800 --> 0:00:24.200 uncounted scientists and doctors, titans of business and speakers at 0:00:24.239 --> 0:00:28.360 the local rotary club, filmmakers and musicians and dancers and architects. 0:00:28.400 --> 0:00:31.880 They're all virtual thieves, swiping the work words and ideas 0:00:31.880 --> 0:00:34.440 of others and passing them off as their own. They 0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:38.920 are plagiarists. We spoke with David Reddinger, a professor of 0:00:38.920 --> 0:00:42.199 psychology at the University of Mary Washington and Fredericksburg, Virginia, 0:00:42.360 --> 0:00:45.440 and the president of the International Center for Academic Integrity. 0:00:46.040 --> 0:00:48.960 He said, it's a particular problem in academia because we 0:00:49.000 --> 0:00:51.479 care so much about the process. I say this to 0:00:51.479 --> 0:00:53.560 my students all the time. I don't care that you 0:00:53.640 --> 0:00:56.120 give me a clean paper. I care that you write 0:00:56.200 --> 0:00:58.920 a paper. It's like sending someone to the gym for you. 0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:03.200 It completely defer it's the purpose. But let's take a 0:01:03.240 --> 0:01:06.480 step back and define plagiarism. Going to the old faithful 0:01:06.520 --> 0:01:10.319 of American English definitions Miriam Webster. Plagiarism is quote to 0:01:10.480 --> 0:01:13.319 steal and pass off the ideas or words of another 0:01:13.400 --> 0:01:17.080 as one's own, to use another's production without crediting the source, 0:01:17.640 --> 0:01:20.399 or to commit literary theft present a new and original 0:01:20.440 --> 0:01:24.800 and idea or product derived from an existing source. For 0:01:24.920 --> 0:01:28.479 one example, we could simply have copied those definitions, which 0:01:28.640 --> 0:01:31.840 in fact we did not changed a word ditto, and 0:01:32.240 --> 0:01:35.840 not credited Miriam Webster. But then, of course we'd be 0:01:35.840 --> 0:01:39.039 flat out plagiarizing, or at the very least trampling on 0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:43.440 the line between plagiarism and the safer albeits leazy word cribbing. 0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:48.120 But since we credited Mariam Webster, it's an attribution, not plagiarism. 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:50.880 The article version of this episode even provided a link. 0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:55.200 Plagiarism is not always that cut and paste easy, though 0:01:55.640 --> 0:01:59.560 The legal definition is as legally as often is murky. 0:02:00.040 --> 0:02:03.680 This is from Cornell Law School's Legal Information Institute. Quote 0:02:03.920 --> 0:02:07.720 deliberately passing off somebody else's original expression or creative ideas 0:02:07.720 --> 0:02:10.560 as one's own. Plagiarism can be a violation of law 0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:14.880 if copyrighted expression is taken. Often, however, plagiarism does not 0:02:14.960 --> 0:02:18.120 violate any law, but instead simply marks the plagiarists as 0:02:18.120 --> 0:02:21.639 an unethical person in the political, academic, or scientific community 0:02:21.680 --> 0:02:27.600 where the plagiarism occurs. So then, what about taking information 0:02:27.680 --> 0:02:30.680 from someone else, twisting a few words around, maybe changing 0:02:30.680 --> 0:02:32.639 a name or two, and passing it off as your own. 0:02:33.160 --> 0:02:35.760 How much do you have to change to avoid plagiarism? 0:02:35.760 --> 0:02:38.519 How much borrowing is too much? Where do you draw 0:02:38.560 --> 0:02:42.280 the line? Rettinger said, it's always okay to use the 0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:45.680 ideas or the words of somebody else. That's not the problem. 0:02:45.720 --> 0:02:49.440 The problem is acknowledging your sources. Different disciplines and different 0:02:49.480 --> 0:02:54.240 situations have different expectations of what's yours and what's shared. Lawyers, 0:02:54.280 --> 0:02:57.320 for another example, can use similar wording in legal briefs, 0:02:57.560 --> 0:03:00.240 maybe even the exact wording. But that may be more 0:03:00.280 --> 0:03:04.880 generally acceptable it is Reddinger says, shared language in their profession. 0:03:05.840 --> 0:03:09.280 But what about scientists or researchers borrowing straight from another 0:03:09.280 --> 0:03:13.200 paper that was based on original research? Or how about 0:03:13.200 --> 0:03:16.799 this example from journalism, a big news site, say taking 0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:19.680 chunks of a story reported and written by another site. 0:03:20.240 --> 0:03:22.519 If it's a one thousand word article done by site 0:03:22.520 --> 0:03:25.480 A and site B uses eight hundred words of it. 0:03:25.560 --> 0:03:29.240 Verbatim is that okay, even if site BE credits site A, 0:03:29.960 --> 0:03:33.359 is that plagiarism? If we can't decide on a precise definition, 0:03:33.680 --> 0:03:36.760 we could probably at least agree it's pretty lame. Though 0:03:36.880 --> 0:03:40.280 it may be that plagiarizers and the plagiarized aren't seeing 0:03:40.280 --> 0:03:44.360 eye to eye, which brings us to another question. Who 0:03:44.360 --> 0:03:48.480 would do such a thing? Students all the time, researchers sometimes, 0:03:48.520 --> 0:03:51.119 According to one study, close to ten percent of retracted 0:03:51.200 --> 0:03:56.360 journal articles were pulled because of plagiarism. Politicians sometimes. For example, 0:03:56.480 --> 0:03:59.280 former U. S Senator and Vice President Joe Biden famously 0:03:59.320 --> 0:04:01.680 was accused of it in a speech and years after 0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:04.120 the fact, admitted to plagiarism he committed as a student, 0:04:04.400 --> 0:04:08.720 though he said it wasn't malevolent. First ladies have Melania 0:04:08.760 --> 0:04:11.240 Trump has been dogged by rumors of plagiarism and speeches 0:04:11.440 --> 0:04:14.200 ever since her opening night address at the Republican National Convention. 0:04:14.200 --> 0:04:19.960 In journalists, as we've pointed out, musicians to Johnny Cash 0:04:19.960 --> 0:04:23.320 has been accused, and poets and writers. A Latin root 0:04:23.360 --> 0:04:25.360 of the word plagiarism was used all the way back 0:04:25.400 --> 0:04:28.839 in ancient Roman times to describe poets plundering one another's works. 0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:34.799 Sometimes we should acknowledge plagiarism is accidental, though. A student 0:04:34.920 --> 0:04:37.600 borrowing an idea from a website while doing research past 0:04:37.640 --> 0:04:39.800 some information into a paper they're working on and forgets 0:04:39.800 --> 0:04:42.960 to attribute it. Obviously, it's a small problem when it's 0:04:42.960 --> 0:04:45.760 a sentence or a brief paragraph. It's a bigger problem 0:04:45.800 --> 0:04:48.880 when several paragraphs or chapters make their way into a paper. 0:04:50.360 --> 0:04:53.279 But some, of course steal on purpose, never intending to 0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:57.720 give others credit. But why. One explanation is laziness, or 0:04:57.760 --> 0:05:00.440 at least an unwillingness to put in the necessary effort 0:05:00.520 --> 0:05:02.680 due to a lack of drive or a lack of time, 0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:08.800 or perhaps expediency. Another explanation is a desire for acceptance 0:05:08.920 --> 0:05:11.720 or a good grade, or maybe a lack of talent, 0:05:11.920 --> 0:05:15.240 or at least a perceived lack of talent. Rettinger said, 0:05:15.560 --> 0:05:18.400 plagiarism begins, I think at the core when a person 0:05:18.520 --> 0:05:21.520 doesn't see the value in creating the work themselves. The 0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:23.520 ones that get me are the students that just don't 0:05:23.520 --> 0:05:25.440 feel like they can do the work. Those are the 0:05:25.440 --> 0:05:28.920 ones that make me the saddest for those who don't 0:05:28.920 --> 0:05:32.320 plagiarize accidentally, and of course it was an accident. As 0:05:32.360 --> 0:05:34.920 the first line of defense for any plagiarist, there are 0:05:34.960 --> 0:05:38.159 any number of reasons to go rogue. In a plagiarist's mind, 0:05:38.200 --> 0:05:41.279 if you're never caught, it's not wrong. It becomes acceptable. 0:05:42.720 --> 0:05:46.440 A former American journalist Jason Blair, fabricated quotes, dreamed up 0:05:46.440 --> 0:05:49.200 things that never happened, stole entire passages from published news 0:05:49.240 --> 0:05:53.440 accounts verbatim, then concocted dozens and dozens of stories, passing 0:05:53.440 --> 0:05:55.480 them off as fact under his byline in The New 0:05:55.560 --> 0:05:57.960 York Times, and he got away with it for years. 0:05:58.839 --> 0:06:01.280 He tried to explain him off to Duke student reporters 0:06:01.279 --> 0:06:05.000 in sixteen, saying, once you do something that crosses any 0:06:05.040 --> 0:06:07.359 ethical line, it is easy to go back and do 0:06:07.440 --> 0:06:09.920 it over and over. I danced around it and then 0:06:09.960 --> 0:06:12.360 crossed it and had a real hard time coming back. 0:06:13.600 --> 0:06:17.000 But with plagiarism's moving definition, it's difficult to pin down 0:06:17.040 --> 0:06:19.840 exactly how many word and idea thieves are among us. 0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:23.040 The biggest battle in the never ending war against plagiarism 0:06:23.080 --> 0:06:26.520 remains in academia, and it's certainly not limited to high schoolers. 0:06:26.920 --> 0:06:29.080 One study, for example, found that more than half a 0:06:29.120 --> 0:06:33.679 four hundred medical students surveyed said they had plagiarized, even 0:06:33.720 --> 0:06:35.839 in the halls of higher learning, though it's hard to 0:06:35.880 --> 0:06:39.839 determine how widespread the problem is. Schools often contract commercial 0:06:39.839 --> 0:06:43.160 firms to use their software to try to catch plagiarism, 0:06:43.200 --> 0:06:46.400 and aside from those, there are online plagiarism checkers that 0:06:46.480 --> 0:06:50.160 compare written papers to a database of published material, sometimes 0:06:50.160 --> 0:06:53.320 for free. These services can be useful both for people 0:06:53.320 --> 0:06:56.520 looking to catch plagiarists and for writers looking to avoid it. 0:06:57.800 --> 0:07:00.560 Rattinger said, it depends on how hard you look and 0:07:00.640 --> 0:07:03.360 what subject you teach and to whom. In terms of 0:07:03.360 --> 0:07:06.760 wholesale plagiarism, probably not that often, but in terms of 0:07:06.800 --> 0:07:09.640 maybe a paragraph here or sentence here, or paragraph or 0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:13.040 sentence there, it depends on your definition of common. But 0:07:13.160 --> 0:07:16.480 my impression is that it's fairly common. It's an arms race, 0:07:16.760 --> 0:07:18.800 and as long as it's on, we're going to lose 0:07:18.920 --> 0:07:22.240 because there are more of them and they're very motivated. 0:07:23.720 --> 0:07:27.760 Slowing plagiarism, though can be a goal. It's critical for educators, 0:07:27.760 --> 0:07:30.480 Writtinger says, to teach students the very real worth of 0:07:30.520 --> 0:07:33.720 researching and writing their own work, and it's important to 0:07:33.760 --> 0:07:36.920 make students and other would be plagiarists understand that both 0:07:36.960 --> 0:07:39.119 sides lose when you try to take credit for another 0:07:39.160 --> 0:07:42.880 person's work, words, or ideas. First of all, you're denying 0:07:42.920 --> 0:07:46.119 yourself the valuable, affirming experience of creating your own work. 0:07:46.600 --> 0:07:49.400 And second of all, it could hurt that credibility you're 0:07:49.440 --> 0:07:51.520 trying to cheat your way into in the long run. 0:07:52.720 --> 0:07:55.360 We also spoke with Jonathan Bailey, a writer in businessman 0:07:55.440 --> 0:07:59.000 who runs the website Plagiarism Today. He said, you might 0:07:59.000 --> 0:08:01.000 be able to get away with it in the short term, 0:08:01.000 --> 0:08:02.480 but it's not just getting away with it in the 0:08:02.480 --> 0:08:04.920 short term. It's about trying to get away with it forever, 0:08:05.400 --> 0:08:08.240 and that is a losing battle. It's almost inevitable that 0:08:08.240 --> 0:08:10.920 you'll get caught in the long term, So be thinking 0:08:10.920 --> 0:08:13.720 about it, not in just terms of today, but could 0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:21.280 this ever come back to bite you. Today's episode was 0:08:21.280 --> 0:08:24.040 written by John Donovan and produced by Tyler Clang. Brain 0:08:24.080 --> 0:08:26.440 Stuff is a production of I Heeart Radio's How Stuff Works. 0:08:26.720 --> 0:08:28.440 For more in this and lots of other topics that's 0:08:28.440 --> 0:08:31.160 cite their sources, visit our home Planet, how Stuff works 0:08:31.160 --> 0:08:33.880 dot com and for more podcasts. For my heart Radio, 0:08:34.080 --> 0:08:36.600 visit the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever 0:08:36.640 --> 0:08:37.880 you listen to your favorite shows.