Morals

• Morals are the prevailing standards of behavior that enable people to live cooperatively in groups.
Moral refers to what societies sanction as right and acceptable.
• Most people tend to act morally and follow societal guidelines. Morality often requires that people
sacrifice their own short-term interests for the benefit of society. People or entities that are
indifferent to right and wrong are considered amoral, while those who do evil acts are considered
immoral.
• While some moral principles seem to transcend time and culture, such as fairness, generally
speaking, morality is not fixed. Morality describes the particular values of a specific group at a
specific point in time. Historically, morality has been closely connected to religious traditions, but
today its significance is equally important to the secular world. For example, businesses and
government agencies have codes of ethics that employees are expected to follow.
• Some philosophers make a distinction between morals and ethics. But many people use the terms
morals and ethics interchangeably when talking about personal beliefs, actions, or principles. For
example, it’s common to say, “My morals prevent me from cheating.” It’s also common to use ethics
in this sentence instead.
• So, morals are the principles that guide individual conduct within society. And, while morals may
change over time, they remain the standards of behavior that we use to judge right and wrong.
 Moral Philosophy

• Moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that contemplates what is right and
wrong. It explores the nature of morality and examines how people should live
their lives in relation to others.
• Moral philosophy has three branches.
• One branch, meta-ethics , investigates big picture questions such as, “What is
morality?” “What is justice?” “Is there truth?” and “How can I justify my beliefs as
better than conflicting beliefs held by others?”
• Another branch of moral philosophy is normative ethics . It answers the question
of what we ought to do. Normative ethics focuses on providing a framework for
deciding what is right and wrong. Three common frameworks are deontology,
utilitarianism, and virtue ethics.
• The last branch is applied ethics . It addresses specific, practical issues of moral
importance such as war and capital punishment. Applied ethics also tackles
specific moral challenges that people face daily, such as whether they should lie to
help a friend or co-worker.
• So, whether our moral focus is big picture questions, a practical framework, or
applied to specific dilemmas, moral philosophy can provide the tools we need to
examine and live an ethical life.
 Consequentialism

• Consequentialism is an ethical theory that judges whether or not something is

right by what its consequences are. For instance, most people would agree that
lying is wrong. But if telling a lie would help save a person’s life, consequentialism
says it’s the right thing to do.
• Two examples of consequentialism are utilitarianism and hedonism. Utilitarianism
judges consequences by a “greatest good for the greatest number” standard.
Hedonism, on the other hand, says something is “good” if the consequence
produces pleasure or avoids pain.
• Consequentialism is sometimes criticized because it can be difficult, or even
impossible, to know what the result of an action will be ahead of time. Indeed, no
one can know the future with certainty. Also, in certain situations,
consequentialism can lead to decisions that are objectionable, even though the
consequences are arguably good.
• For example, let’s suppose economists could prove that the world economy would
be stronger, and that most people would be happier, healthier, and wealthier, if we
just enslaved 2% of the population. Although the majority of people would benefit
from this idea, most would never agree to it. However, when judging the idea
solely on its results, as classic consequentialism does, then “the end justifies the
means.”
 Hedonism

• Hedonism is the belief that pleasure, or the absence of pain, is the most
important principle in determining the morality of a potential course of
action. Pleasure can be things like “sex, drugs, and rock ’n’ roll,” but it can
also include any intrinsically valuable experience like reading a good book.
• Hedonism is a type of consequentialism, and it has several forms. For
example, normative hedonism is the idea that pleasure should be people’s
primary motivation. On the other hand, motivational hedonism says that
only pleasure and pain cause people to do what they do.
• Egotistical hedonism requires a person to consider only his or her own
pleasure in making choices. Conversely, altruistic hedonism says that the
creation of pleasure for all people is the best way to measure if an action
is ethical.
• Regardless of the type of hedonism, critics fault it as a guide for morality
because hedonism ignores all other values, such as freedom or fairness,
when evaluating right and wrong.
 Utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines right from wrong by focusing on

outcomes. It is a form of consequentialism.
• Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical choice is the one that will produce the
greatest good for the greatest number. It is the only moral framework that can be
used to justify military force or war. It is also the most common approach to moral
reasoning used in business because of the way in which it accounts for costs and
benefits.
• However, because we cannot predict the future, it’s difficult to know with certainty
whether the consequences of our actions will be good or bad. This is one of the
limitations of utilitarianism.
• Utilitarianism also has trouble accounting for values such as justice and individual
rights. For example, assume a hospital has four people whose lives depend upon
receiving organ transplants: a heart, lungs, a kidney, and a liver. If a healthy person
wanders into the hospital, his organs could be harvested to save four lives at the
expense of one life. This would arguably produce the greatest good for the
greatest number. But few would consider it an acceptable course of action, let
alone the most ethical one.
• So, although utilitarianism is arguably the most reason-based approach to
determining right and wrong, it has obvious limitations.
 Deontology

• Deontology is an ethical theory that uses rules to distinguish right from wrong. Deontology is often
associated with philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant believed that ethical actions follow universal
moral laws, such as “Don’t lie. Don’t steal. Don’t cheat.”
• Deontology is simple to apply. It just requires that people follow the rules and do their duty. This
approach tends to fit well with our natural intuition about what is or isn’t ethical.
• Unlike consequentialism, which judges actions by their results, deontology doesn’t require
weighing the costs and benefits of a situation. This avoids subjectivity and uncertainty because you
only have to follow set rules.
• Despite its strengths, rigidly following deontology can produce results that many people find
unacceptable. For example, suppose you’re a software engineer and learn that a nuclear missile is
about to launch that might start a war. You can hack the network and cancel the launch, but it’s
against your professional code of ethics to break into any software system without permission. And,
it’s a form of lying and cheating. Deontology advises not to violate this rule. However, in letting the
missile launch, thousands of people will die.
• So, following the rules makes deontology easy to apply. But it also means disregarding the possible
consequences of our actions when determining what is right and what is wrong.
 Virtue Ethics

• Virtue ethics is a philosophy developed by Aristotle and other ancient Greeks. It is

the quest to understand and live a life of moral character.
• This character-based approach to morality assumes that we acquire virtue through
practice. By practicing being honest, brave, just, generous, and so on, a person
develops an honorable and moral character. According to Aristotle, by honing
virtuous habits, people will likely make the right choice when faced with ethical
challenges.
• To illustrate the difference among three key moral philosophies, ethicists Mark
White and Robert Arp refer to the film The Dark Knight where Batman has the
opportunity to kill the Joker. Utilitarians, White and Arp suggest, would endorse
killing the Joker. By taking this one life, Batman could save multitudes.
Deontologists, on the other hand, would reject killing the Joker simply because it’s
wrong to kill. But a virtue ethicist “would highlight the character of the person who
kills the Joker. Does Batman want to be the kind of person who takes his enemies’
lives?” No, in fact, he doesn’t.
• So, virtue ethics helps us understand what it means to be a virtuous human being.
And, it gives us a guide for living life without giving us specific rules for resolving
ethical dilemmas.
 Moral judgement

• The term ‘moral judgement’ can refer to an activity, a state,

a state-content, a capacity or a virtue. The activity of moral
judgement is that of thinking about whether something has
a moral attribute. The thing assessed might be an action,
person, institution or state of affairs, and the attribute
might either be general (such as rightness or badness) or
specific (such as loyalty or injustice). If I engage in this
activity and make up my mind, then the result will be the
formation of a psychological state: the state of judging that
the thing has the attribute. The state should then be
distinguished from its content: what is judged by me, rather
than my judging it. My psychological state of judging that
human trafficking is wrong is a feature of me with a
duration and location that depend on me.
• But the content of that state – the wrongness of human trafficking
itself – is not a feature of me. Philosophers also frequently use
‘moral judgement’ to refer to a capacity: our alleged capacity ‘to go
beyond the application of rules’ when we deliberate morally. And,
going further, it can be used as a term of commendation, referring
to a moral virtue (or set of virtues) that we might also call ‘moral
discernment’ or ‘moral wisdom’, displayed when we exercise that
capacity well. Someone with the virtue of moral judgement, it is
often claimed, has an appropriate sensitivity to the way in which
the individuality of a person or the particularity of a context can
determine how it is right to act, think and feel – a sensitivity that
cannot be captured in any general rule. Moral judgement in these
various senses raises four main groups of philosophical questions.
• First, what kind of psychological state is the state of
moral judgement? Is it, either wholly or in part, a
belief, or is it some kind of noncognitive state?
Secondly, what is required in order for a moral
judgement-state, or the content of that state, to be
justified? What kind of support do moral judgements
require? Thirdly, how ought the activity of moral
judgement to be conducted? In particular, what role
within this activity is properly played by the application
of rules? Do we need a capacity that goes beyond rule-
application? And, fourthly, what is it to possess the
virtue of moral judgement?
 Moral Response

• Often when we make moral judgements, we find

they are tied up with our emotional reactions.
For instance, we typically feel happy when good
things happen to good people and angry when
we witness things that are unjust. We may also
feel personal satisfaction at having done the right
thing and pride in having it recognized. Similarly,
we often feel guilt for acting badly and shame
when others call us out for it. These familiar
experiences are moral judgements just as much
as emotional reactions.
• Although emotions can be important and instructive by alerting us to
moral issues, they are sometimes not well justified on reflection. Indeed,
in some instances, once we reflect on our emotions, we may find that they
are ethically quite misleading. Even positive emotions, like love, may lead
us to misjudge a situation, prompting us to defend friends or family
members who have, in fact, behaved badly. Negative emotions can be
equally misleading. Most of us have had the experience of being in a fit of
anger and doing something (or at least thinking of doing something) that
we later recognize was morally wrong. The Roman historian Tacitus
believed that many people have a tendency to hate those whom they have
injured.[1] Our emotional reactions to our own bad behaviour might distort
our perception of our victims in ways that would make us prone to harm
them yet further. This should trouble anyone who is inclined to let their
emotions govern their actions. Indeed, philosophical traditions that
foreground moral emotions tend to emphasize the importance of
cultivating virtuous or appropriate emotional responses
• If our emotions can be fallible guides to moral action,
what else might we consider? We might think about
how others will judge our actions or how they would
act were they in our place. Again, this can be
instructive in terms of alerting us to moral
considerations . Nonetheless, this is typically
insufficient for coming to a justified moral judgement.
There are good reasons for this. There are many biases
in our society and many people who behave badly. If
we simply judge as others judge and follow what
others do or what they expect us to do, we may end up
making some terrible judgements and engaging in
some heinous behaviour.
• It can be deeply disturbing to discover that
those who hold a respected place in our
community or the people we love have
immoral attitudes or have engaged in morally
repugnant behaviour. Nonetheless, if we truly
care about doing the right thing, we must be
open to making such discoveries. We may
even discover that attitudes or conventions
that are widely accepted in our society are
nonetheless morally pernicious.
• Of course, many social conventions are perfectly
morally acceptable. Some may even be morally
required. After all, conventional norms and
practices offer a set of rules for behaviour that
help the members of society understand one
another and fruitfully interact with each other.
However, in order to be able to distinguish
conventions that are useful and good from those
that are bigoted and bad we need to go beyond
the conventions themselves. This is where
normative ethics, philosophical analysis and
argument come in.
• Now, one might wonder how we can discover that we
ourselves or members of our community have been
following customs that are morally wrong, if we are
located in societies and communities that follow these
customs. This is where moral theory, conceptual
analysis, and argumentation come in. We can use
moral theories to assess the norms, conventions, and
practices of our own communities. Even so, it is
difficult to understand how things might be different
from within our own culture. This is where outside
perspectives are particularly valuable.
Scientific Conduct-Intellectual
Honesty, Research Integrity and
Scientific Misconduct
 INTELLECTUAL HONESTY

We have a moral duty to be honest. This duty is especially

important when we share ideas that can inform or persuade
others.

Intellectual Honesty combines good faith with a primary

motivation toward seeking true beliefs.
 INTELLECTUAL HONESTY
➢ Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis,
and transmission of ideas. A person is being intellectually
honest when he or she, knowing the truth, states that truth.

➢ This includes all forms of scholarship, consequential

conversations such as dialogue, debate, negotiations,
product and service descriptions, various forms of
persuasion, and public communications such as
announcements, speeches, lectures, instruction,
presentations, publications, declarations, briefings, news
releases, policy statements, reports, religious instructions,
social media posts, and journalism including not only prose
and speech, but graphs, photographs, and other means of
expression.
 Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving,
characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be
demonstrated in a number of different ways including:

 Ensuring support for chosen ideologies does not interfere with the
pursuit of truth;
 Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when
such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
 Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give
misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
 References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible,
and plagiarism is avoided.
 Ethics

➢ The word ethics is derived from the Greek word ‘ethos’ (meaning a person’s
character, nature, or disposition)
➢ Relating to morals, treating of moral questions; morally correct, honorable… Set of
principles of morals… Science of morals, moral principles, rules of conduct, whole
field of moral science
➢ distinction between right and wrong or good and evil, in relation to actions,
volitions, or character of responsible beings
 Ethical problems in Social
Science research
➢ The complexity of a single research problem can give rise to multiple
questions of proper behavior
➢ Sensitivity to ethical issues is necessary but not sufficient for solving them
➢ Ethical problems are the results of conflicting values
➢ Ethical problems can relate to both the subject matter of the research and the
conduct of the research
➢ An adequate understanding of an ethical problem sometimes requires a broad
perspective based on the consequences of research
➢ Ethical problems involve both personal and professional elements
➢ Ethical problems can pertain to science and to research
➢ Judgments about proper conduct lie on a continuum ranging from the clearly
unethical to the clearly ethical
 Nature of Moral Judgement

➢ If the researcher is inviting the subject to enter into a

relationship which is honest and open the researcher
owes his or her subject to a similar level of honesty and
openness
➢ If the researcher is encouraging honesty and openness
of a kind which exposes the subject to risk of hurt or
injury then the researcher has some obligation to
protect the subject from that hurt or injury.
 Nature of Ethical Reactions in
Research
➢ Research subjects should be considered as another granting institution,
granting their valuable time in return for generation of valuable scientific
knowledge
➢ The traditional cost-benefit model that underlies ethical decision making in
social research should be modified to emphasize the outcomes of both doing
and not doing the research, and also the possibilities of doing the research in
another manner
➢ A more detailed reporting of ethical procedures used should be required and
expected in all published social research
➢ A focus on the ethical acceptability of applied research should become a
critical component of a mutually reinforcing applied scientific community
➢ Evaluations of the ethical acceptability of social research require an
awareness of the ethical climate in society and in the scientific community
 Epistemology, Ethics
and Educational Research
➢ To unsettle or question established belief
➢ To conjecture about possible alternatives and develop
new ways of seeing things
➢ To describe or illuminate aspects of experience
➢ To search for reasons, evidence and/or argument for
warrant that might support one belief rather than another
➢ To test beliefs and establish at least provisionally the
truth of the matter under investigation
 Generalizable Knowledge

➢ Knowledge contributes to a theoretical framework of an

established body of knowledge
➢ Results are expected to be generalized to a larger population
beyond the site of data collection or population studied
➢ Results are intended to be replicated in other settings
 RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the

ethical principles and professional standards essential for the
responsible practice of research.
By active adherence we mean adoption of the principles and
practices as a personal credo, not simply accepting them as
impositions by rule makers.
By ethical principles we mean honesty, the golden rule,
trustworthiness, and high regard for the scientific record.
“For individuals research integrity is an aspect of moral
character and experience. It involves above all a
commitment to intellectual honesty and personal
responsibility for ones actions and to a range of practices
that characterize responsible research conduct.’’ - National
Achievement Survey (NAS)
 These practices include….

Honesty and fairness in proposing, performing, and

reporting research;

Accuracy and fairness in representing contributions to

research proposals and reports;

Proficiency and fairness in peer review;

Collegiality in scientific interactions, communications and

sharing of resources;
 Disclosure of conflicts of interest;

 Protection of human subjects in the conduct of research;

 Humane care of animals in the conduct of research;

 Adherence to the mutual responsibilities of mentors and

trainees."

While science encourages (no, requires) vigorous defense of

one's ideas and work, ultimately research integrity means
examining the data with objectivity and being guided by the results
rather than by preconceived notions.
Scientific Integrity and Research
Ethics
➢ Act only in such a way that you would want your actions
to become a universal law, applicable to everyone in a
similar situation.
➢ Act in such a way that you always treat humanity
(whether oneself or other), as both the means of an
action, but also as an end.
➢ Act as though you were a law-making member (and also
the king) of a hypothetical “kingdom of ends”, and
therefore only in such a way that would harmonize with
such a kingdom if those laws were binding on all others.
 Elements of Professionalism

➢ Intellectual honesty
➢ Excellence in thinking and doing
➢ Collegiality and openness
➢ Autonomy and responsibility
➢ Self-regulation
 Scientific Misconduct

The violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and

ethical behavior in professional scientific research...(research
that) deviates from practices commonly accepted in the
discipline or in the academic and research communities
generally in proposing, performing, reviewing, or reporting
research and creative activities
 Common types of scientific misconduct

➢ Falsification is the changing or omission of research results/data to support

claims, hypotheses, other data, etc. Falsification can include the manipulation
of research instrumentation, materials, or processes. Manipulation of images
or representations in a manner that distorts the data or “reads too much
between the lines” can also be considered falsification.
➢ Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data, observations, or
characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or running of
experiments. Fabrication can occur when “filling out” the rest of experiment
runs. Claims about results need to be made on complete data sets as
normally assumed, where claims made based on incomplete or assumed
results is a form of fabrication.
➢ Plagiarism is the use of someone else’s work without attribution, passing it
off as one’s own. Text, figures, tables, and even ideas can be plagiarized.
When a whole entity (e.g., an entire article, a figure, a table, or a dataset) is
republished without attribution or permission, there may be a copyright
violation as well as ethical misconduct.
 Unethical Practices in Scientific
Research
➢ Intentional negligence in the acknowledgment of previous work
➢ Deliberate fabrication of data we have collected
➢ Deliberate omission of known data that does not agree with the
hypothesis
➢ Passing another researcher’s data as one’s own
➢ Publication of results without the consent of all of the
researchers
➢ Failure to acknowledge all of the researchers who performed
the work
➢ Conflict of interest
➢ Repeated publication of too-similar results or reviews Breach of
confidentiality
 Causes of Scientific Misconduct
➢ Conflict of interest—personal, professional, and financial
➢ Policies regarding human subjects, live vertebrate animal subjects in
research, and safe laboratory practices
➢ Mentor/mentee responsibilities and relationships
➢ Collaborative research, including collaborations with industry
➢ Peer review
➢ Data acquisition and laboratory tools management, sharing, and ownership
➢ Research misconduct and policies for handling misconduct
➢ Responsible authorship and publication
➢ The scientist as a responsible member of society, contemporary ethical
issues in biomedical research, and the environmental and societal impacts of
scientific research.
 What is Plagiarism?

Plagiarism is presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own,

with or without their consent, by incorporating it into your work
without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished
material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is
covered under this definition. Plagiarism may be intentional or
reckless, or unintentional. Under the regulations for examinations,
intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.
Possible Reasons for Plagiarism

➢ Increased pressure to publish

➢ Ease of copying and pasting online work
➢ Difficulties in writing in English or another language
➢ Misplaced respect for other’s work
➢ Lack of suitable training
➢ Lack of awareness of the rules for acknowledgement of
other’s work
 Forms of Plagiarism

➢ Verbatim (word for word) quotation without clear

acknowledgement
➢ Cutting and pasting
➢ Paraphrasing
➢ Collusion
➢ Inaccurate citation
➢ Failure to acknowledge assistance
➢ Use of material written by professional agencies or other
persons
➢ Auto-plagiarism.
Plagiarism as per Guidelines of IEEE

➢ Self- (or team) plagiarism without identification and

acknowledgement
➢ Cutting and pasting of other’s work without identification and
acknowledgement
➢ Replication of methods sections without clear statement of the
source
➢ Republication of conference papers with little added value
➢ Review papers which largely replicate previously published content
➢ Plagiarism of images/tables/formulae/data without both
acknowledgement and copyright permission
➢ Plagiarism of ideas
➢ Wholesale plagiarism of previously published text
➢ Republication in translation without acknowledgment, permission
and full citation
What to look for?

➢ http://www.ithenticate.com

➢ http://turnitin.com

➢ https://pubpeer.com

➢ http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts
Duplicate (dual) publication

A sizable portion of scientific and scholarly research is carried out by individuals working in
academic or research institutions where advancement structures continue to rely on the
presentation and subsequent publication of research in peer-reviewed journals. Because the
number and the quality of publications continue to be the most important criteria for gaining
tenure and/or promotion, the more publications authored by a researcher, the better his/her
chances of earning a promotion or tenure. As can be expected, and in the context of decreasing
or, at best, stagnant funding for research, the current reward system produces a tremendous
amount of pressure for scientists to generate as many publications as possible.

Unfortunately, some of the most serious negative consequences of the present system, aside
from fabrication, falsification and outright plagiarism, are the problems of duplicate publication
and of other forms of redundancy. In the sciences, duplicate publication generally refers to the
practice of submitting a paper with identical or near identical content to more than one journal,
without alerting the editors or readers to the existence of its earlier published version. The new
publication may be exactly the same (e.g., identical title, content, and author list) or differ only
slightly from the original by, for example, changes to the title abstract, and/or order of the
authors. Papers representing instances of duplicate publication almost always contain identical
or nearly identical text and/or data relative to the earlier published version. More problematic
instances of duplicate publication occur when various components of a paper change (e.g., title,
authorship), but the underlying data remain the same, making duplication more difficult to
uncover.

Redundancy, publication overlap and other forms of duplication: Although the prevalence
of blatant duplicate publications varies across disciplines, its overall prevalence is relatively low
and their impact on the integrity of science is likely minor, particularly in instances when the
published papers are truly identical (i.e., same title, abstract, author list). However, other forms
of duplication exist and these are often classified with terms such as redundant publication or
overlapping publication .

Redundant publication, often referred to as duplicate publication, occurs when a researcher

submits or publishes the same research findings in multiple places, such as different journals or
conferences. It’s like wearing the same outfit to multiple parties – it might save you time, but it’s
not acceptable in the academic world.

Key Points:

● Redundant publication is like recycling your research without adding new insights.
● It can lead to ethical and copyright issues.
● Journals and publishers frown upon it.

Over lapping publication:

Any publication that is published with the same text, data, materials and methods with
the same set of author/s can be called an overlapping of information. It is an exact duplication
of the originally published/submitted/under review manuscript.
Below are some of the most common forms of overlapped duplicate publication.

Data aggregation/augmentation: In this type of duplication, data that have already been
published are published again with some additional new data -Zulle, 2013. The resulting
representation of the aggregated data is likely to be conceptually consistent with the original
data set, but it will have different numerical outcomes (i.e., means and standard deviations),
figures, and graphs (see Bonnell, Hafner, Hersam, Kotov, Buriak, Hammond, Javey, Nordlander,
Parak, Schaak, Wee, Weiss, Rogach, Stevens & Willson, 2012 for an example). This type of
publication is highly problematic when the author presents the data in a way that misleads the
reader into believing that the entire data set is independently derived from the data that had
been originally published. That is, the reader is never informed that a portion of the data being
described had already been published or perhaps the presentation is ambiguous enough for the
reader to be unable to discern the true nature of the data.

Data disaggregation: As the label suggests, data disaggregation occurs when data from a
previously published study are published again minus some data points and with no 19
indication or, at best, ambiguous indication as to their relationship to the originally published
paper. The new study may consist of the original data set minus a few data points now
considered outliers, or perhaps data points at both ends of their range that happen to lie outside
a newly established criterion for inclusion in the new analyses, or perhaps some other
procedure that results in the exclusion of some of the data points appearing in the original study.
As with data augmentation, the new publication with the disaggregated data will contain different
numerical outcomes (i.e., means and standard deviations), figures, and graphs, however, the
underlying data are largely the same as the previously published data, but are presented in a
way that misleads the reader into interpreting the ‘new’ data as having been independently
collected.

Data segmentation: Also known as Salami Publication or Least Publishable Unit, data
segmentation is a practice that is often subsumed under the heading of self-plagiarism, It is
usually mentioned in the context of self-plagiarism because the practice often does include a
substantial amount of text overlap and possibly some data as well, with earlier publications by
the same author/s. Salami slicing is a sneaky cousin of redundant publication. Instead of
rehashing the entire study, researchers slice their data into smaller, less meaningful chunks and
publish them separately. It’s like cutting a salami into thin slices and serving them as separate
snacks.

Key Points:

● Salami slicing involves breaking down research into smaller, publishable units.
● It’s considered unethical because it artificially inflates a researcher’s publication count.
● It can dilute the significance of the original research.
Turnitin Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/turnitin/#features

2 of 11 16-Mar-24, 10:36 PM
Turnitin Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/turnitin/#features

5 of 11 16-Mar-24, 10:36 PM
Turnitin Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/turnitin/#features

6 of 11 16-Mar-24, 10:36 PM
DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/drillbit-plagiarism-checker/#features

Description Pricing
CategoriesFeatures
Brands Speci�cation
Industry Compare
Review
Ask Question
Compare Blog FAQs Get Free
Alternatives
Advice Get Free Advice BecomeBuy Now
a Seller

Business Software › Marketing Tools › Plagiarism Checker › DrillBit Plagiarism Checker

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker

Brand : DrillBit

4.6 4 Ratings & 4 Reviews Write a Review Have Questions?

Starting Price:
Call Now
₹ 5,000 excl. GST View plans
₹ 5,900 incl. GST

Save Extra with 2 Offers

Save upto 28%, Get GST Invoice on your business purchase | T&C

Buy Now & Pay Later, Check offer on payment page.

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Software is one of the best anti-plagiarism solutions available in the market. This plagiarism
software is designed to reduce the duplication and plagiarism in research and dissertation papers. It checks for the
duplicity of the content with online sources and generates ... Read more
See
More
Get Free Demo Buy Now

Get Instant Expert Safe & Secure Assured Best Price

Advice Payment Guaranteed

Description Pricing Features Speci�cation Review Compare FAQs Alternatives

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Software Pricing, Features & Reviews

What is DrillBit Plagiarism Checker?

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Software is one of the best anti-plagiarism solutions available in the market. This plagiarism software is designed to reduce the duplication and
plagiarism in research and dissertation papers. It checks for the duplicity of the content with online sources and generates results quickly and e�ciently.

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker supports zip �les for quicker checking, along with that it also supports different formats like PDF, doc, docx, txt, HTML, PPT, etc. It provides source links
for the plagiarized content simultaneously for comprehensive checking. Numerous colleges across India use this plagiarism-checking software for their regular copy-checking work.

What features does the DrillBit Plagiarism Checker offer?

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker offers bene�cial features to ease and quicken the process of checking for copying; here are a few features listed below for better comprehension:

• Repository for Universities

• Modi�ed Alpha-Numeric Detection
• Erroneous Word Detection
• E-mail Noti�cations
• Summary Reports for Checking
• Content Tracking in Real-Time for Checking
• Centralized Admin Panel Monitoring
• Website Integration
• Selective exclusion of sources (for citation consideration)
• Option to Exclude Only Similarity Percentage
• Automated Grading System

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker price

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker in india is available in three different plans: DrillBit, DrillBit Ref, and DrillBit Extreme. Drillbit Software Price in India starts from Rs 5000/-. For more
inquiries about the pricing and details, please request a call. Our sales team will contact you shortly.

Compare 2 Products

1 of 9 16-Mar-24, 10:56 PM
DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/drillbit-plagiarism-checker/#features

Description Pricing Features Speci�cation Review Compare FAQs Alternatives Get Free Advice Buy Now
DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Pricing & Plans

DrillBit DrillBit Ref DrillBit Xtreme

Multi Language Support Multi Language Support Multi Language Support

Language Translator Language Translator Language Translator
Spell Checker Spell Checker Spell Checker
Punctuation Checker Punctuation Checker Punctuation Checker
Analytics & Reporting Analytics & Reporting Analytics & Reporting
Repository Repository Repository

Quantity
- 1 +
(500 Pages)

Yearly
- 1 +
(Year(s))

Calculated Price (Exclusive of all

taxes) Price On Request Price On Request
₹ 5000
Request for Price Request for Price
Buy Now

Compare 2 Products

2 of 9 16-Mar-24, 10:56 PM
DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Pricing & Reviews 2024 | Techjockey.com https://www.techjockey.com/detail/drillbit-plagiarism-checker/#features

Description Pricing Features Speci�cation Review Compare FAQs Alternatives Get Free Advice Buy Now
DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Features

Feedback Integration capabilities Paper auto-grading

Users can provide feedback for the papers Organizations can integrate this plagiarism As mentioned above, the software is capable
checked for plagiarism and grade them in checking software with their ongoing APIs of correcting papers based on linguistic
the system. and websites for seamless working. accuracy. (like tense, punctuation,

Multi File Format Support Reports Generation Dashboard

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker supports multiple The generates reports for all the plagiarism The dashboard provides access to all the
formats like ppt, doc, docx, PDF, etc. related work performed in a timespan. features of the software.

Multi-browser Support Modi�ers And Add-ons Wide network coverage

DrillBit can be accessed through any web The software offers sentence modi�ers and The software checks for plagiarism through
browser of choice. several add-ons for enhanced content a wide range of sources from the internet.
writing and plagiarism checking.

Repository Multi Language Support Language Translator

Universities can create a repository of DrillBit Plagiarism Checker offers support for The software has a translator that helps in
research papers of their institute. The multiple Indian languages. translating from one language to any
software automatically checks for regional language of choice.
plagiarism from

Spell Checker Punctuation Checker Analytics & Reporting

The software automatically checks for DrillBit performs a thorough check-up on the This plagiarism checking software produces
spelling errors and provides corrections. content and identi�es punctuational errors. a comprehensive report of the plagiarism
checking done throughout the day.

DrillBit Plagiarism Checker Speci�cations

Supported Platforms : Windows

Device: Desktop

Deployment : Web-Based

Suitable For : Education, Media House

Business Speci�c: School/Colleges

Language: English

Compare 2 Products

5 of 9 16-Mar-24, 10:56 PM