<
https://theconversation.com/plagiarised-research-passed-automated-tests-and-i-detected-it-but-only-because-it-copied-my-work-279553>
"Earlier this year, I published a paper on the ethics of researching military
populations.
The core argument was straightforward: the standard rules researchers follow to
protect participants – for example, informed consent and voluntary
participation – don’t work the same in an institution built on hierarchy and
obedience.
A soldier can, as protected by ethics, say no to participating in research. But
when their commanding officer has nominated them, the practical reality of
saying no is very different from the legal right to do so. My paper explored
the tension between ethical rights and lived reality.
A couple of weeks ago I was asked to peer-review a manuscript submitted to a
psychology journal on the same topic. It didn’t take long for me to become
suspicious. As I read on, I came to realise the safeguards in place to protect
research integrity are not keeping pace with the tools that can be used to
circumvent them."
Cheers,
*** Xanni ***
--
mailto:xanni@xanadu.net Andrew Pam
http://xanadu.com.au/ Chief Scientist, Xanadu
https://glasswings.com.au/ Partner, Glass Wings
https://sericyb.com.au/ Manager, Serious Cybernetics
