As
a college professor with over 20 years of teaching experience, I have come to
appreciate the value of good writing. Unfortunately for me, writing has always
been a somewhat aversive task for it takes me a considerable amount of time and
effort to produce a good written product. I know the same applies to a number
of my colleagues and many students. Because of the many competing demands on our
time, some of us often procrastinate when faced with the task of writing. When
students wait until the very last minute to write a paper, the end result is
likely to be a poor academic product that fails to represent the best of their
abilities. This situation is exacerbated if these types of assignments are
viewed as arbitrary, instructor-imposed hurdles to be overcome in the most
expedient and economical way possible. Such an attitude is incompatible with
what is expected of an aspiring professional and must be replaced by a
different attitude, one in which such assignments represent an opportunity to
acquire an in-depth understanding of some aspect of the course or to broaden
knowledge in a specific area. Writing a research paper also allows students to
learn how to synthesize findings from one or more areas of research into a
coherent whole. It can also help in the development of new insights about
interesting psychological phenomena. Perhaps most important of all, writing
papers allows students the opportunity to further enhance their reading,
writing, and critical thinking skills—skills highly sought after by employers
and graduate admissions committees.
One of the most serious consequences of poor writing is that sometimes it may
lead to inadvertently deceptive practices. For example, students may engage in
inappropriate paraphrasing or may fail to credit sources. Both of these lapses
are potentially serious offenses as they could result in a charge of
plagiarism. Or, in an effort to make their case, students may exaggerate the
importance of the phenomenon under review or the extent to which the existing
literature supports their point of view. As psychologists-in-training within
the scientist/ practitioner model, and particularly as members of the honor
society in psychology, we have an ethical obligation to be faithful to the
pursuit of truth. Consequently, students must make every effort to avoid these
inappropriate writing practices and always strive for excellence.
One approach that I have found useful in this regard is to introduce the
concept of ethical writing (e.g., Kolin, 2001, pp. 24-31). This notion refers
to an implicit contract between the reader and the writer whereby the reader
assumes, unless otherwise clearly noted in the paper, that (a) the material
presented is original, that is, the individual listed as the author is the one
who wrote the paper; (b) facts and figures presented are accurate; and (c) the
written product is new and has not been submitted elsewhere. With these
assumptions in mind, let’s review some common student writing practices that
violate these basic principles.
Paraphrasing, Summarizing, and Plagiarism
I cannot imagine a student who in this day and age is not familiar with the
concept of plagiarism. Yet, I have read too many student papers in which the
authors have either come very close to or have (unknowingly, I hope) committed
outright plagiarism because they did not know how to properly paraphrase or
summarize from sources. In some cases, students mistakenly feel that as long as
a citation is provided, it is acceptable to take portions of text verbatim from
another source, or that as long as they change a few words, minor modifications
constitute an acceptable paraphrase. Some students even believe that if the material
is taken from the Internet, it can be recycled word-for-word without the need
for a citation. These practices are unacceptable, as they constitute
plagiarism. Material taken from another source, whether it is a book, a
journal, a magazine, an Internet site, or a lecture, can either be enclosed in
quotation marks, summarized, or paraphrased. A citation must be included in
each of these instances. For example, let’s suppose you are writing a paper on
astrology and you find the following material from Coon (1995) useful and want
to include it in your paper:
If
you have ever had your astrological chart done, you may have been impressed
with its seeming accuracy. Careful reading shows many such charts to be made up
of mostly flattering traits. Naturally, when your personality is described in
desirable terms, it is hard to deny that the description has the ‘ring of
truth’ (p. 29).
You could copy the entire segment, enclose it in quotation
marks, and provide a reference citation as follows:
If
you have ever had your astrological chart done, you may have been impressed
with its seeming accuracy. Careful reading shows many such charts to be made up
of mostly flattering traits. Naturally, when your personality is described in
desirable terms, it is hard to deny that the description has the ‘ring of
truth’ (Coon, 1995, p. 29).
Or you could summarize it as follows:
Because
astrological charts are mostly positive, people are more inclined to accept
them and thus believe in their accuracy (Coon, 1995).
Or you could paraphrase it as follows:
According
to Coon (1995), astrological charts are primarily composed of complimentary
attributes. He noted that when we are described with positive, laudable traits,
we are more inclined to accept these flattering portraits of ourselves. Thus,
it is no surprise to Coon that individuals who have had their charts done tend
to be swayed by their apparent precision.
Notice how most of the words and the sentence structure in
these new versions have been substantially modified. Now consider an
inappropriately paraphrased version:
According
to Coon (1995), if you ever have had your astrological chart done, you were
probably impressed by how accurate it seemed. A careful reading indicates many
such charts to be made up of mainly flattering traits. Of course, it is hard to
deny that the description has the ‘ring of truth’ when your personality is
described in desirable terms.
Why
is the above version inappropriately paraphrased? Because even though the
author provided a citation, the author misappropriated significant portions of
verbatim text (i.e., italicized text) from the original. Such paraphrasing is
not acceptable and is viewed as plagiarism.
In sum, when we paraphrase, we have to reproduce the meaning of the other
author’s ideas using our own words and sentence structure. However, you should
not rely primarily on paraphrasing others’ material. In fact, your professors
are more likely to expect that you summarize the important points from the
sources you consult for your paper and the process of summarizing is a little
different. When we summarize, we condense, in our own words, a substantial
amount of material into a short paragraph or perhaps even into a sentence. To
properly paraphrase and/or summarize text, the writer must have a thorough
conceptual understanding of the material and the proper command of the
terminology employed in that knowledge domain. Because it is likely that when
you write a paper some or most of the material will be new to you, a good
dictionary of terms used in psychology can be very helpful. Also, if you have
Internet access, sites of secondary sources such as Wikipedia can be excellent
resources to help you understand unfamiliar information that you uncover from
your research of the primary literature (i.e., journal articles).
Self-Plagiarism (Double Dipping)
A related unethical writing practice is the concept of self-plagiarism, which
occurs when students submit academic work that had been previously submitted to
another course. Many students do not consider this practice as a form of
cheating. But what about reusing half of a previously submitted paper or a
quarter of a paper? On very rare occasions, I have actually allowed students to
submit portions of a paper previously submitted for another course that I had
taught, as long as the material in the resubmitted version was substantially
revised and enhanced. For example, a student in one of my classes who had
submitted a research proposal (literature review and methods section) as part
of the requirements for one course was allowed to carry out the actual study
described in the proposal. For the more advanced course, I let her submit a
longer version of the paper, which included an expanded literature review and
the old methods section, plus new results and discussion sections. A professor
may determine that such resubmission of previously graded work may be
appropriate in cases such as the one described above. However, in those cases,
instructors in both courses must be fully informed of the intended reuse of the
academic product and both should approve the reuse. Again, be mindful of the
reader-writer contract. If any portion of an old paper is to be reused in a new
paper, the author has an ethical obligation to inform the reader (i.e., the
instructor) of the extent of such reuse.
Issues With Citations
Citing articles that were not read. Over the years I have seen too many
cases of (inadvertently?) deceptive citation practices. A common transgression
occurs when a student finds an article that summarizes the pertinent literature
and in her paper cites various studies reviewed in the article. However, the
student never actually read any of those studies! This is a deceptive practice
that must be avoided. When an article is listed in the reference section of a
paper, the reader (e.g., the instructor) assumes the student has read that
article. It is true that there may be times when a study cited in a review
article has been published in a journal that may be difficult to locate. After
all, no one should expect that their college or university library carry a
subscription to every one of the nearly 30,000 scholarly scientific journals
now available. In such cases, it is acceptable to cite that study as long as we
inform the reader of the fact that the information cited is derived from a
secondary source. In fact, the APA’s Publication Manual (2001) provides a
specific format and an example for such situations. In the APA example, if the
article read by the student was authored by Colheart, Curtis, Atkins, and
Haller in 1993, and the difficult-to-locate article was authored by Seidenber
and McClelland, the citation would appear as follows in the student paper:
"A
study by Seidenber and McClelland (as cited in Coltheart, Curtis, Atkins, &
Haller, 1993) demonstrates that …”.
Only
the Coltheart et al. reference would appear in the reference section of the
paper. Typically, the expectation is that students will consult primary
sources; therefore, I recommend that this type of strategy only be used under
exceptional circumstances.
Listing the full citation instead of the abstract. A situation related
to the above scenario occurs when students locate abstracts from journal
articles that are relevant to their paper. They cite material from the abstract
in the body of their paper, but cite the actual paper without indicating that
the material had been derived from the abstract. Consistent with the principles
of ethical writing, the APA manual requires that authors identify the citation
as an abstract, rather than the actual article, as follows
Fournier,
M., de Ridder, D., & Bensing, J. (1999). Optimism and adaptation to
multiple sclerosis: What does optimism mean? Journal of Behavioral Medicine,
22, 303-326. Abstract retrieved March 10, 2003, from PsychINFO database.
Other Questionable Writing Practices
Selective reporting. Scientific truth and responsible scholarship entail the
highest degree of objectivity in reporting the results of our research. As
aspiring professionals, we have an ethical obligation to present relevant
points of view in a fair and balanced manner. Unfortunately, for a variety of
reasons we sometimes lose our objectivity, and the result can be a paper that
is slanted favorably towards the particular position we hold with a negative
bias against those positions we argue against. Such biases can be very
pernicious and manifest themselves in a variety of ways. For example, in
reviewing the literature, authors may downplay or be unfairly dismissive of
evidence that is contrary to their hypotheses or theories while at the same
time exaggerate the importance of supporting evidence. In other instances,
authors may fail to report results of analyses that are not consistent with
their hypothesis. In sum, ethical writing demands complete fairness and
objectivity.
Acknowledging others’ assistance. It is common for professors to have
one of their colleagues review their papers before submitting them for
publication. Having someone review our work will often result in the detection
of problems that managed to escape our scrutiny. Likewise, students may have a
sibling or peer review their work. In both instances, the authors have an
ethical obligation to acknowledge the nature and extent of any assistance
received. This is typically done with a short footnote (i.e., author note in
APA style) at the end of the paper. Identifying the nature of assistance
received from others allows your instructor to determine the extent to which
the academic product is the result of your own individual efforts and abilities.
This is an important step in obtaining a fair assessment of your academic
products.
Using an excess amount of quoted material. Perhaps as a result of
inadequate writing skills or possibly academic laziness, students sometimes
include an excessive amount of quoted text from one or more sources. With some
exceptions (e.g., the use of a technical term or phrase, or in book reviews),
the inclusion of quoted portions of text from other sources is not a common
occurrence in published journal articles and the same expectation applies to
student papers. However, some student authors tend to abuse this legitimate
mechanism of conveying information by including several portions of quoted
text. In the eyes of most instructors, such excessive use of quotations reflects
poorly on the student. Quotes from other sources should only be used in
exceptional circumstances, such as when even the best paraphrase fails to
convey the elegance of the original.
The Causes of Unethical Writing
On many occasions, I find that cases of plagiarism and other unethical writing
practices occur because students procrastinate to the point of being unwilling
or unable to invest the necessary time and intellectual resources to create a
good academic product. Academic procrastination has been recognized as a
significant factor in poor student performance and many universities’
counseling centers offer students tips for minimizing its effects (see, for
example, SUNY at Buffalo’s web site: http://ub-counseling.buffalo.edu/ stressprocrast.shtml
or Cal Poly’s site: http://www.sas.calpoly.edu/asc/ssl/ procrastination.html).
For a more detailed review of the latest counseling methods designed to tackle
the problem of academic procrastination, see the work of Schowuenburg, Lay,
Pychyl, and Ferrari (2004).
In other instances unethical writing practices are the result of inexperience
and/or ignorance of proper scholarly conventions. To address this gap in
students’ knowledge, an increasing number of university libraries have
developed tutorials on plagiarism and proper citation practices. For example,
see Rutgers’ very entertaining video tutorial at http://library.camden.rutgers.edu/
EducationalModule/Plagiarism/. For a more comprehensive treatment of
these issues written specifically for advanced science students and beginning professionals,
see my on-line instructional resource on ethical writing at http://facpub.stjohns.edu/~roigm/plagiarism/.
The Importance of Ethical Writing
In closing, I wish to emphasize, again, how important it is for students to
develop good writing skills. Clear and effective writing is critical to
academic success, and it is one of the most valued skills in the modern
workplace. However, whether it is being used for academic or professional purposes,
writing must not only be mechanically sound, clear, and persuasive, it must
also be accurate and, above all, honest. I note that these principles of
ethical writing are also relevant to other facets of personal and professional
life. Because our discipline requires a life-long dedication to ethical,
professional conduct, our writing must also exemplify that same level of moral
commitment.
References
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Coltheart, M., Curtis, B., Atkins, P., & Haller, M. (1993). Models of
reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches.
Psychological Review, 100, 589-608.
Coon, D. (1995). Introduction to psychology: Exploration and application (7th
ed.). New York: West.
Kolin, P. C. (2001). Successful writing at work (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton
Mifflin.
Schowuenburg, H. C., Lay, C., Pychyl, T. A., & Ferrari, J. R. (2004).
Counseling the procrastinator in academic settings. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.