Plagiarism: A Guide

Peer-reviewed Mis-attribution

2007-12-18T13:20:00.000-08:00

(for an overview, see: mis-attribution)

The simplest type of mis-attribution, peer-reviewed mis-attribution is the substituting, as the source of an idea, an invalid but real source for the valid one.

Why would you want to do this?

To create the illusion of having done more research than you really have. If, for example, you're writing a paper with a minimum research requirement of five sources, and you've only cracked two books, then you would take the titles of three other books or articles and use them to source information you've gotten from the pair you've actually looked at.

The key is to use existing, not made up, sources.

If you're not comfortable using peer-reviewed mis-attribution on its own, then consider reinforcing it with a well-placed decoy.

see also: foreign mis-attribution
see also: ghost mis-attribution
see also: the foreign source

The Decoy

2007-12-18T13:12:00.000-08:00

A decoy can be defined as any technique that intentionally draws focus away from real plagiarism. However, it is usually an easy-to-spot and tempting "mistake" that you want your teacher to notice, so that he or she fails to notice something else.

There are many types of decoys—and many more undiscovered ones. But the key to implementing any decoy is a proper mindset.

see also: the blank footnote

The Blank Footnote

2007-12-18T12:20:00.000-08:00

(for an overview, see: the decoy)

One of the most versatile and elastic tools in the plagiarist's arsenal: the blank footnote, the lone number, the joker. Much like a being dealt a wild card in a game of crazy academia, the blank footnote allows you to turn any situation to your immediate advantage.

How?

By relying on your teacher's good will and laziness. Faced with an ambiguous situation ("Oh, dearie, what does this blank footnote mean?"), he or she will usually give you the benefit of the doubt. And benefits of the doubt are ripe for exploitation.

Use of the blank footnote is, however, limited to once (maybe twice) per teacher. Anything more, and your game gets obvious.

But, since you can use it once, let's take a look at what it can do:

1. A blank footnote can be a type of mis-attribution. Have a lot of words that aren't backed up by anything and need them supported? Stick a blank footnote near the end! A little number does wonders for making your scholarship suddenly look more solid. After all, you obviously meant to fill it in and simply forgot, right?

2. You can also use a blank footnote to hide plagiarism. Although it may seem illogical to draw attention to plagiarism by intentionally footnoting it incorrectly—your teacher will undoubtedly notice—that's the point: he or she will usually let it slide ("Oh, dearie, I'm sure Johnny meant to write the correct footnote in and he just forgot"). Yes, you may get docked a few marks for improper notation, but the plagiarism will stand. Plus, if on the rare chance you get called out for plagiarism and called in to talk to the teacher, you'll have an easy defense.

3. The blank footnote can also be used to break up sections of your essay that draw too heavily one source—an easy-to-spot flaw and one your teacher will most definitely dock you for. So disguise it. Break up large chunks of repeated notes by inserting a blank one. Visuals are important.

4. Finally, the blank footnote can be a type of decoy. Use it as a one-off to draw attention away from something else. Since it's easy to see and easy to comment ("Oh, dearie, Johnny, remember to proofread your footnotes before you hand in your essay"), teachers will love to pounce on it. And once a paper has enough comments and marks taken off to justify moving on to grading the next paper, your teacher will.

The blank footnote is plagiarism's utility player. Used properly, it can be a game-breaker.

Ghost mis-attribution

2007-12-16T18:56:00.000-08:00

(for an overview, see: mis-attribution)

Ghost mis-attribution is the attribution of a non-existent source to an original idea, with the intention of granting academic legitimacy to that idea.

Playing with ghost mis-attribution is a juggling act. You can't survive on phantom sources alone! Ghost mis-attribution can, however, be vital in bolstering your own argument at a key time or as a last-minute time saver. It's quite versatile, as well: use it to cite an idea you got from a place you can't remember, use it to cite an idea you've made up, or use it to break up a series of citations from the same real source.

At its core, ghost mis-attribution relies on bluffing—or, better yet, on avoiding detection altogether. You want to sneak false information by your teacher.

Ghosts can be:

1. invented people, books, articles

2. invented information in an actual book or article written by a real person

Obviously, inventing whole works, or entire academics, is risky! And usually unnecessarily risky. It's far more common to use an existing work, and claim that it argues something it doesn't. It's much harder to catch, too, because it actually involves your teacher opening a book he or she probably doesn't have on his or her desk. People and books, on the other hand, can simply be checked in Google.

The best way to sneak things by is to remain within the realm of possibility. Don't give your teacher a reason to doubt your claim. Appear real: ghost mis-attribute to works on your topic, for example; or mix proper attribution with mis-attribution within the same work. Also, sometimes giving page ranges, rather than single pages, reads more convincing.

But stay away from books or articles that everyone in your field knows! Standard and popular texts are usually cited for the same few ideas, and anything different sticks out. Instead, take something between well-known and obscure. Play the middle.

In the end, the risks associated with well done ghost mis-attribution come down to how often you use it. Every mis-attribution adds to your chances of being discovered. Plan accordingly.

see also: foreign mis-attribution
see also: peer-reviewed mis-attribution
see also: the foreign source

Foreign Mis-attribution

2007-12-16T18:20:00.000-08:00

(for an overview, see: mis-attribution)

Foreign mis-attribution is the attribution of a false or real foreign source to an original idea, with the intention of granting academic legitimacy to that idea.

For example, if you decide to write a paper arguing that the character Ophelia in Shakespeare's King Lear is actually a closet lesbian, you'll probably want to provide evidence. The play you'll have to scour yourself, of course, but original research in the humanities or social sciences is often insufficient to convince your teacher that you're right or bright. Hence, you'll need secondary sources: proof that earlier academics have either already argued what you're arguing, or have argued something similar. In academia, unless you're established, you have to build on those who are.

If such precedents exist, it may be tough to search them out; if they don't exist, doubly tough. In either case, you may wish to take a shortcut: simply invent the precedents.

Dabble in English inventions at your own peril, however! Teachers may be limited in their knowledge, but they do know their own field. To move away from what they know, move the playing field beyond their language and beyond their country.

Here, you have a choice: exactly how much to invent?

1. You could go all the way and invent an entire person. If you do, pick common names that will be a pain to look up on Google.

2. You could pick a real academic (search some university, college or academic journal sites) somewhat in your own area of interest. If you choose this route, make sure they're not terribly well known. As an added twist, you could also pick the last name of a real academic and change the first name.

Regardless, once you get past the person, whether real or imaginary, you'll have to decide on a source. Again, choices:

1. If you're using a real person, you can also choose a real source. Instant credibility. The downside: you're being specific. If your teacher manages to check the source, you're cooked. There are still ways out of the predicament, but you'd rather not get into it in the first place.

2. If you're using a real or imaginary person, you can use an imaginary source. A fake article in a real journal that isn't indexed online is one good choice. As is any title in the original language. That way, it won't be a dead give-away when the title returns no searches in Google. If you want to get extra tricky, find a real title in English, then translate it into another language, and make that the title of your invented foreign source!

In the end, it really does come down to creativity. There are hundreds of variations and tips for the ultimate foreign mis-attribution. But always remember:

Make it appear reasonable and make it Google-proof.

see also: ghost mis-attribution
see also: peer-reviewed mis-attribution
see also: the foreign source

Mis-attribution

2007-12-16T17:55:00.001-08:00

Although not within the realm of pure plagiarism, mis-attribution is nevertheless a valuable tool to have at your disposal.

Broadly defined, mis-attribution is:

The attribution of words or ideas to someone other than their creator.

As you can see, plagiarism is a distinct form of mis-attribution because it's an implicit attribution of someone's work as your own; but it's not the only kind. And other forms of mis-attribution can be powerful allies when added to the forces of plagiarism. These useful types of mis-attribution include:

Foreign Mis-attribution

Ghost Mis-attribution

Peer-reviewed Mis-attribution

The Foreign Source

2007-12-16T17:02:00.000-08:00

If you're blessed with knowledge of a foreign language—or, for the more adventorous, even if you're not—one of the best sources to plagiarize is the wealth of non-English scholarship available at your school library: French, German, Spanish, Russian, you name it. If you can read it, it can be plagiarized. And, if you can't read it, you can still put it to good use (see: foreign mis-attribution).

However, there are several factors to consider when choosing non-English sources for plagiarism.

1) You have to decide how obscure you want to go. Normally, the mid-to-obscure route is the safest because it gives you the greatest chance of hitting the sweet spot: that grey area between what your teacher has heard about and what seems so obscure that it's fishy. Seem original without seeming crazy. Although, obviously, it depends on your own particular context.

2) You have to know something about your teacher. If he or she speaks English and German, for instance, don't pick a German source! Also, remember that just because you've found something in a foreign language, doesn't mean it's not available in English, too—either in translation or because what you've found is a translation.

3) Check any footnotes in the source you choose to plagiarize. It could very well be that what you think is a great idea in an unknown Swahili source is actually from a popular English-language treatise that your teacher has on his or her shelf. Find the roots of ideas, and plagiarize only if they're shallow and firmly implanted in foreign soil.

Montaigne

2007-12-16T16:56:00.000-08:00

French Renaissance man:

"Amongst so many borrowed things, am glad if I can steal one, disguising and altering it for some new service."

Well said, monsieur.

John Milton

2007-12-16T15:12:00.000-08:00

Perhaps the greatest poet in the English language:

"Copy from one, it's plagiarism; copy from two, it's research."

The lines between things are thin. As Satan falls out of Heaven, so plagiary out of research.

Ralph Waldo Emerson

2007-12-16T15:08:00.000-08:00

The great American Transcendental, writer and thinker:

"It has come to be practically a sort of rule in literature, that a man, having once shown himself capable of original writing, is entitled thenceforth to steal from the writings of others at discretion."

The point of education is to teach you how to do something. In the case of writing, the goal is to teach you how to write. Once you have proven yourself a writer, be excused from ceaseless examination! If not, then excuse yourself.

Aelius Donatus

2007-12-16T14:57:00.000-08:00

A 4th-century Roman teacher of rhetoric:

"Perish those who said our good things before we did."

For why should they receive the laurels of originality merely because Chance deemed they be born before our own time?

The Cut & Paste

2007-12-16T13:22:00.001-08:00

The most basic and most common form of plagiarism. All it takes is one highlight and two clicks of the mouse. Try it now, if you like.

The problems with the cut-and-paste are many.

For one, it's usually rather identifiable. Because people have various writing styles (we're all at different writing levels, prefer different words, construct our sentences in different ways, use various tones, and even use punctuation differently), sticking someone else's sentence between two of your own isn't too tough to spot.

The trick, then, is to make the plagiarized sentences blend in.

There are a few ways to accomplish this. The most straightforward is to blur the distinction between the plagiarized and the original by substituting your own words for some of the ones you've plagiarized. However, be warned: don't just right-click in Word and use the thesaurus! Know your own writing style, and choose substitute words that adhere to it. Don't delete a word from the original because you'd never use that word only to replace it with something more obscure. Be bland. Blend.

Another neat trick is the decoy.

Here, you attempt to draw attention away from the plagiarized passages by abusing the thesaurus and intentionally overwriting in another part of your paper. In other words, intentionally write outside of your own voice, and make it blatant. The goal is to trick the person marking your paper into singling out that part of the essay as potential plagiarism—and letting the real plagiarism pass unnoticed. Deception well done, lads.

A second problem with cutting and pasting arises because of sources: what you plagiarize. The smart plagiarist plagiarizes from more suitable material than the lazy plagiarist. What do I mean by more suitable material? Not necessarily better academically, but, rather, better suited for the purpose of not getting caught. So: less well-known work, worse-written work, and—in case they ask questions to test your knowledge—something of which you have a basic understanding. Notice that this requires a bit of intelligence. Plagiarism isn't a game for the slow-witted.

The bottom line with the cut-and-paste method is that it's crude and quick. Most plagiarists who use it, use it out of laziness. And, more importantly, they don't provide any cover. Think of the cut-and-paste like an ambush. It's dark, foggy, you're crouching in the bushes waiting for the enemy to come within range so that you can pounce on him. But what happens if the sun comes up, the fog clears, and the bushes disappear? You're just crouching in an open field: covert predator turned to easy prey. Ambush failed.

Therefore, when you use the cut-and-paste, turn the conditions in your favour. Don't just cut-and-paste. Cut and paste and fudge and smudge and distract.

Blend the plagiarism into the original and draw away attention.

Good luck.

Plagiarism: FAQ

2007-12-16T13:13:00.000-08:00

Below you'll find answers to some of the most common questions about plagiarism. You'll also find answers to questions that should be more popular than they are.

What is plagiarism?

Is plagiarism illegal?

Does my teacher want to catch me plagiarizing?

The Panzer Pistol Rule

2007-12-16T12:37:00.000-08:00

There's a great scene in the Czech film Closely Watched Trains. The main character, Milos, is remembering the "heroes" in his family, and brings up the bravery of his hypnotist grandfather, who, when the Germans were crossing into Czechoslovakia, stood in the front of their tanks and worked his hypnosis so they'd stop. Did they stop? Yes—for a few seconds. Then they started to roll again, right over top of grandpa.

You Can't Stop a Panzer with a Pistol

Don't try to stop a Panzer if all you've got is a pistol. Either get yourself a better tactic and a more powerful weapon, or step aside. If you step forward and open puny fire, you're roasted.

Or, in more practical terms:

If you're faced with a massive assignment and all you can muster is a half-hearted attempt at plagiarism that's full of obvious copy-and-pasting, don't even bother. You'll get crushed.

Good plagiarism takes work and effort. But, as long as it takes less work than actual original research and writing, you come out ahead. Just remember not to get too greedy, and do assess the situation correctly. Papers that are worth more marks will be read more closely. Papers that are more closely read require a more sophisticated level of plagiarism to pass undetected.

Hence, while you can't stop a Panzer with a pistol, you can stop it with a well-placed bazooka blast. Find the bazooka, aim the blast.

Two vs. None

2007-12-16T12:14:00.000-08:00

Here's a common misconception:

Your teacher wants you to fail. Hence, your teacher wants to catch you for plagiarism.

In fact, your teacher doesn't want you to fail, and doesn't want to catch your plagiarism. Your teacher—unless he or she is an unrepentant cunt—wants pretty much the same as you: to get the job done with for as little effort expended as possible.

Catching plagiarism takes more work than assigning a grade.

Plagiarism has to be checked, argued, proven. If your teacher suspects you of plagiarism, he or she must check books and articles, compare words and ideas, and probably talk to you, before he or she can make the claim that you're a plagiarist.

Why would your teacher want to do this?

Because they want to save their own skin. Passing, or failing to notice, clearly plagiarized papers will reflect badly on him or her! But the key words here are: clearly plagiarized.

Most people who get busted for plagiarism are bad, lazy plagiarists. They leave their teachers little choice. And while your teachers don't want you to fail, they will fail you if it means their own job and livelihood. Like you, teachers are inherently selfish.

However, both you and your teacher start on the same side.

In other words, plagiarism is a team sport!

That's an incredible advantage for the budding plagiarist. Essentially, it means that if you plagiarize in a way that doesn't insult your teacher's intelligence, he or she won't try too hard to notice anything out of the ordinary.

Rather than a game of one vs. one, then, what plagiarism usually comes down to is two vs. the goal. That's right: one ball, two players, and an empty goal.

It takes a real wanker to fuck that up.

Don't be that wanker.

Realize the rules of the game and play accordingly.

The Elephant Gun Rule

2007-12-16T11:43:00.000-08:00

Plagiarism is a skill of many tactics. It's like theft. Just as there are many ways to steal, there are many ways to plagiarize. The key to proper plagiarism is choosing the right tactic for the right situation, employing the right weapons for the right enemy. It takes more than nimble hands to pull a casino heist. But, at the same time, you don't need Danny Ocean to pick a pocket.

Don't Bring an Elephant Gun to a Rat Hunt

A well-done bit of plagiarism takes a good deal of time and effort. Sometimes, it's simply not worth the trouble. Unless you're a plagiarist by principle, if original research and original writing would take you less time than going through the rigor of properly done plagiarism, then think about either doing original work—or, better yet, tone down the quality of the plagiarism.

An assignment worth 10% of your mark isn't going to be marked (or read) as closely as a paper worth 50%. Take advantage of this, work within the boundaries of the situation. Think of it like playing a footie match: if the opposition is shoddy, you don't have to play as well as against a classier team. Don't play brainless, but lay off some challenges, walk a little instead of sprint.

Which brings us back to the title:

Don't go rat hunting with an elephant gun, because an elephant gun is unwieldy and uncomfortable. Yes, you'll blow away the rats, but what's the point? Plagiarism is the art of getting by on minimal effort. If you want to lug a huge weapon around, just do the work.

Smart plagiarism starts with the application of the proper tools to get the job done.

see also: The Panzer Pistol Rule

What is plagiarism?

2007-12-15T22:28:00.001-08:00

It's sound academic principle to always define your terms before you use them. Hence, let's consult a dictionary and find out what exactly plagiarism is:

The unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work.

Except, that's not quite right.

Why?

1. Authorization doesn't make a whiff of difference. Most fine-standing institutions of higher learning won't even let you plagiarize yourself—a situation where, you'd assume, authorization was given, since you're the author.

Hence, plagiarism does not depend on the consent of the plagiarized.

2. Plagiarism doesn't exist only when both language and thoughts are used. Instead: plagiarism is the close imitation of the language or thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work. One, the other, or both.

Hence, plagiarism can involve either words or ideas, or both.

To recap, then, a revised definition of plagiarism:

The use of the language or thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own work.

Plagiarism is not a crime!

2007-12-15T22:12:00.000-08:00

Really, it isn't.

No matter what your teachers, parents, or peers may have told you, plagiarism is not a crime.

It's an academic offense.

Infringing on someone's copyright may be a crime—and you may be infringing on someone's copyright when you plagiarize—but plagiarism, in itself, is not illegal.

That's why schools throw around words like "unethical" and "immoral" when they tell you about plagiarism. That's all they've got. They try and create confusion, of course, to scare you into obeying their rules. But they can't do much if you know the truth.

Which, to say it in positive terms, is this:

Plagiarism is legal