Comparar métodos
Revisa los métodos seleccionados uno junto a otro; las filas que difieren aparecen resaltadas.
| Plagio de ideas y robo conceptual× | Plagio por parafraseo× | |
|---|---|---|
| Campo | Ética de la investigación | Ética de la investigación |
| Familia | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Año de origen | 1980s | 1980s |
| Autor original | Academic integrity framework (modern definition) | Academic integrity framework (modern definition) |
| Tipo | Concept | Concept |
| Fuente seminal≠ | Hirsch, L. R. (2013). Recognizing plagiarism: A guide for academic professionals. Teaching Professor Blog. link ↗ | Roig, M. (2015). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity. link ↗ |
| Alias | conceptual plagiarism, idea theft, intellectual theft | insufficient paraphrase, close paraphrase, lazy paraphrasing |
| Relacionados≠ | 3 | 4 |
| Resumen≠ | Idea plagiarism, or conceptual plagiarism, occurs when an author takes another's ideas, arguments, theories, or conceptual frameworks and presents them as original work without crediting the source. Unlike verbatim or paraphrasing plagiarism (which involve copying language), idea plagiarism involves taking the intellectual content itself—the argument, theory, or framework—regardless of how it is worded. It is the hardest form of plagiarism to detect because it does not require word-for-word copying. | Paraphrasing plagiarism occurs when an author rewrites another's ideas in different words but does not cite the source. Unlike verbatim plagiarism (copying word-for-word), paraphrasing plagiarism involves changing vocabulary and sentence structure while retaining the original argument, logic, or conceptual content without attribution. It is harder to detect than direct copying but is still a clear violation of academic integrity. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de datos ↗ |
|
|