研究論文 | 學術寫作之新倫理議題「自我抄襲」:內涵演進、真實案例、現行規範與預防之道

圖片取自期刊官網

標題 | 學術寫作之新倫理議題「自我抄襲」:內涵演進、真實案例、現行規範與預防之道

TITLE | Self-plagiarism in Academic Writing: Concepts, Cases, Regulations, and Best Practices

作者 AUTHORS | 周倩 Chien Chou、潘璿安 Sophia Jui-An Pan

中文摘要 | 近年學術倫理在臺灣受到高度的重視,但由於對自我抄襲的理解與討論有限,故在其認定原則與標準上,尚缺乏明確的共識。有鑑於此,本文之目的在於釐清自我抄襲的內涵,以協助學術界能由更正向與多元的角度看待這個新倫理議題。本文以文本分析法,研析過去與自我抄襲相關的文獻與規範。在論述上,本文首先探討自我抄襲的內涵,包含此概念的演進歷程、定義、判定方式、納入與排除的具體情事,以及應避免為之的原因;接續透過發生於荷蘭的真實案例,敘說自我抄襲所引起的兩極化爭議;本文亦整理出臺灣中央主管機關在自我抄襲相關規範上之沿革,並於文末提出有助於預防自我抄襲的辦法。

ABSTRACT | In recent years, academic ethics has garnered increased attention in Taiwan. However, due to limited understanding and discussion of self-plagiarism, no clear consensus exists on principles and standards for recognizing and handling the issue. The purpose of this study is to clarify key concepts, regulations, and best practices regarding self-plagiarism so that local scholars can approach this new ethical issue from an informed perspective. Using the method of document analysis, published articles are analyzed to illustrate current norms related to self-plagiarism. This article examines the concept of self-plagiarism in terms of the emergence of concern for this ethical issue, relevant definitions, methods for recognizing its occurrence, common types and exclusions, and the importance of avoiding the pitfalls of self-plagiarism. The analysis also cites an actual case of self-plagiarism that took place in the Netherlands to illustrate the controversies surrounding self-plagiarism. In addition, the article summarizes the historical evolution of relevant norms of self-plagiarism in Taiwan and proposes methods to guide best practices regarding ethical scholarly writing and publishing.

🌐 Full Text (Chinese) with Extended English Summary


建議引用格式(APA):
周倩、潘璿安(2020)。學術寫作之新倫理議題「自我抄襲」:內涵演進、真實案例、現行規範與預防之道。圖書資訊學刊,18(2),43–72。 http://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.202012_18(2).043
Chou, C., & Pan, S. J.-A. (2020). Self-plagiarism in academic writing: Concepts, cases, regulations, and best practices. Journal of Library and Information Studies, 18(2), 43–72. http://doi.org/10.6182/jlis.202012_18(2).043 [In Chinese]

%d bloggers like this: