Research Misconduct Defined

An undergraduate student is working in a professor’s lab for the summer. The student is struggling, not seeing an expected trend in the data. However, they notice that if they remove five data points, a trend can be established. Not wanting to disappoint their supervisor, the student decides to remove the data points and present the altered data to the supervisor without acknowledging that data points have been removed.

Why is This Misconduct?

The student has falsified data, which entails manipulating, changing, or omitting data, source material, methodologies or findings without acknowledging that changes have been made. In misrepresenting the data, the student has created an inaccurate representation of what the results actually showed, undermining the integrity of the research.

What Should Have Happened Instead?

The student had an opportunity to learn in this situation by honestly reporting the results to the supervising professor and asking for further guidance. Important developments in ideas often happen when researchers try to make sense of evidence that challenges assumptions or expectations. For example, what if the missing trend indicates that further data needs to be collected or the methodology revised? The student should have honestly identified the missing trend so the professor can determine appropriate next steps in the research.

A graduate student is completing their thesis but struggling to find relevant evidence to support a key argument. Locating a journal article by another scholar that contains excellent evidence, the student copies a paragraph verbatim with the intention of coming back and re-writing the section in their own words. When the student submits the thesis, however, the student’s supervisor notices that one paragraph sounds different from the rest of the thesis. Through a simple Google search, the supervisor determines that the paragraph has been plagiarized from the published journal article.

Why is This Misconduct?

In plagiarizing, the student has presented the published work as their own by failing to properly attribute the source. Plagiarism is defined as the act of presenting and using another’s published or unpublished work, including theories, concepts, data, source material, methodologies or findings as one’s own, without appropriate referencing or, if relevant, permission. It is unethical to plagiarize because it misleads the reader by falsely attributing authorship, undermining the originality of the research and infringing on another scholar’s intellectual property.

What Should Have Happened Instead?

To avoid plagiarizing, this student needed to implement three key research skills:

• Proper note-taking during the research process;
• Documenting sources during the writing process; and
• Summarizing in their own words.

To get started, consult Laurier’s Assignment Planner, which helps students schedule and break down these and other steps in the research process.

Proper note-taking involves keeping track of sources during the research process to create an accurate record of materials consulted. That way, the researcher has a “trail” of sources and, unlike the graduate student in our scenario, doesn’t lose track of what ideas came from which source.

Creating a good set of research notes entails:

• Summarizing sources examined, identifying key ideas, strengths, weaknesses, and its relevance to the research project.
• Highlighting important ideas and passages you’ll need to revisit.
• Recording bibliographic information to simplify the citation process and the compilation of the bibliography.
• Keeping tracking of where you found each source (call number, database etc.) so you can quickly relocate items, if necessary.

Research notes make the process of documenting sources much easier once you’re writing. To demonstrate how your ideas engage with existing knowledge as well as properly attribute ideas to their authors, all material must be integrated and cited in your prose according to the documentation style in your discipline. Using a citation management tool like Mendeley or Zotero can help keep track of citations during the research process.

Consult the style guide in your discipline for guidance on formatting.

Documentation involves:

• Providing context for the source when you introduce it in your text (Who is writing? What are they writing about? Why?)
• Citing the source in in your text (What is the page number or specific location of the idea?); and
• Compiling all your sources at the end of your text in the form of a bibliography, also referred to as references (APA) or works cited (MLA).

Writing Support has lots of resources to guide you in citing properly. You can also consult the writing and researching with integrity page.

Summarizing means being able to capture the main ideas of a source in your own words. It's a fundamental skill in academic writing because it lets you demonstrate your understanding of other’s ideas. Learning to effectively summarize also helps you avoid the situation of the graduate student who plagiarized: when you know how to summarize ideas in your own words, the less you need to quote sources directly, reducing the likelihood of plagiarism.

A student is finishing their Master’s thesis but is feeling overwhelmed by the amount of research and writing left to do. To save time, they decide to copy a section from a journal article they recently published, word for word, into the final chapter of the thesis. The student doesn’t acknowledge in the thesis that they’ve copied from their own article.

Why is This Misconduct?

In reusing their own work without acknowledgment, this student has committed self-plagiarism. Other examples can include reusing direct language from a previous discussion board post or cutting and pasting verbatim passages from one paper to another. Self-plagiarism can also include reusing assignments submitted during your undergraduate degree in a graduate program. In misrepresenting ideas as new, self-plagiarism not only undermines the creation of original knowledge, but also limits a student’s scholarly development.

Self-plagiarism is unethical because it:

• Misleads the reader by falsely representing the work as original.
• Fails to demonstrate a writer’s growth or learning.
• Through repetition, makes some ideas appear more significant than they are in the scholarship.
• Can lead to copyright violations if an author is duplicating material across multiple publications.

What Should Have Happened Instead?

Self-plagiarism is different from the legitimate development of a writer’s previous ideas. Writers can transparently build upon their own work by acknowledging the original source, summarizing their own work, and reframing ideas to avoid verbatim repetition.

For example:

In my earlier work on urban gentrification in Kitchener (2018), I compared two neighbourhoods – Cedar Hills and Central Frederick – to identify disparities in residential rental rates.

In my previous discussion post, I highlighted my discomfort in response to Lise Gotell’s article on gender-based violence and Alberta’s boom-bust economy. In this week’s post, I want to elaborate on those ideas through a different lens.

To practice ethical, transparent habits as an academic writer

• Do not repeat yourself verbatim.
• Master the art of paraphrasing so you can accurately summarize your previous ideas, as well as the ideas of others.
• Use every assignment as an opportunity to develop new ideas, building on but not replicating your existing knowledge.
• Differentiate between your own ideas and those of others through clear and consistent citation practices.
• Consult with your academic mentors on how to build on previous ideas in new assignments.
• If you are struggling with academic workload, idea development, or do not understand the assignment, seek help from course instructors, academic advisors, or supervisors.

A postdoctoral fellow is conducting research but is also a paid consultant for a company who has a vested interest in the research findings. The postdoctoral fellow does not disclose their relationship with the company when preparing a journal article that reports on results from the study.

Why is This Misconduct?

In omitting any mention of the relationship with the company, the postdoctoral fellow has failed to appropriately identify a conflict of interest. Any real, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest must be identified to avoid undermining the legitimacy of the research or casting doubt on the veracity of its findings.

What Should Have Happened Instead?

When submitting the manuscript for publication, the postdoctoral fellow needed to disclose the nature and scope of the relationship with the company to the editors of the journal. The editors could then have worked with peer reviewers and the researcher to determine if the conflict of interest has repercussions on the integrity of the research.

A student is applying to the Tri-Agencies for funding to support their graduate studies. On their application, they misrepresent themselves as a credentialed professional in their field, without checking to see whether this might require additional training or accreditation.

Why is This Misconduct?

If someone claims to be a credentialed professional without the required accreditation, they are committing fraud. Some disciplines require extra education, training, or accreditation to be allowed to use specific titles or offer specific services. For example, even with a law degree, a person cannot practice law in Canada without first being called to the bar. Similarly, a person cannot call themselves a psychologist without being licensed by the College of Psychologists of Ontario.

What Should Have Happened Instead?

Before claiming on their application to hold a credential, the student should have checked with their discipline to determine the process to work in the field or use a particular title or designation. Students can research accredited career paths in their field by consulting with academic advisors, supervisors, and Laurier’s Career Centre. The student should have also carefully consulted the application instructions to ensure they represent their academic background and experience accurately and honestly.

What are the Repercussions for Research Misconduct?

Repercussions depend on the nature of each case, but all cases of student misconduct are disciplined in accordance with the Student Code of Conduct: Academic Misconduct.

Penalties may include, but are not limited to:

• Failure on the thesis or dissertation;
• Suspension from the university for a designated period of time;
• Expulsion from the program or from the university;
• Cancellation or revocation of the degree or diploma, where the offence pertains to the eligibility to receive such a degree or diploma, whether discovered before or after the degree or diploma is awarded; or
• Inclusion of a statement in the student’s transcript pertaining to the suspension or expulsion or to the cancellation or revocation of the degree.

Additionally, if the research in question was funded by the Tri-Agencies, the misconduct will be reported to the appropriate Agency, which in turn may choose to impose its own penalties.