Being original is the best policy

Be very careful during research to avoid anything that might give rise to the impression that one is plagiarising or being dishonest in any other way. 

Nicholas Murray Butler (1862-1947, Nobel Peace Prize 1931) and Brander Matthews (1852-1929, Literary critic) were discussing stories. Matthews: "In the case of the first man to use an anecdote there is originality, in the case of the second there is plagiarism; with the third, it is lack of originality; and with the fourth it is drawing from a common stock."

"Yes," broke in Butler, "and in the case of the fifth it is research."

Transcribe faithfully

During research, when you quote a sentence or passage for strengthening an argument, transcribe the text faithfully, including punctuation marks. Do not change even a word. Do not forget to use quotation marks to indicate clearly the quoted part.

Do not quote anything in such a way that it would send a message different from that intended by the author. You should never give an impression that that the quotation was taken out of context.

You should not make the inadvertent mistake of including a quote as your own statement. You should follow a rigour while taking notes. No excuse can save you if are caught for plagiarism, even if it is unintentional.

While taking notes, mark your personal summary, paraphrase or interpretation, and quotations separately.

Later on, you can add your views, opinions, analysis, and findings.

If you venture into the dangerous area of paraphrasing or giving a summary of someone else's work without giving credit to him, do compare it with the original so that there is no room given for an allegation of plagiarism.

In any case, you need not quote copiously from any author. After all, the thesis is yours.

Effecting relationship

Plagiarism by the researcher is sure to spoil his relations with the supervisor, who may have to play the unpleasant role of a detective to preserve his own reputation as well as that of the institution.

The student will have to pay a heavy penalty for the crime, including loss of the research facility he enjoys.

It may be remembered that there are web sites that examine papers submitted for checking plagiarism by comparing the contents with a huge bank of documents.

Hoaxes

The history of science is replete with notorious hoaxes. They represent an ominous weakening of the norm of scientific truthfulness. Here are three instances of nasty fraud committed by researchers.

Look at the shame and tragedy that befell South Korean biomedical scientist Hwang Woo Suk of stem cells fame, who sprung up as a national hero and then rose to international stardom. Hwang's lab was the only one in the world that claimed remarkable breakthroughs in cloning human cells, making new human embryos from single adult cells.

Cells cultivated from such embryos, called stem cells, could be crucial for studying diseases, such as diabetes and Parkinson's, and in treating patients. Mr. Hwang claimed that he worked from 6 a.m. till midnight everyday. His research papers appeared in the prestigious Science magazine. Later on his claims were found to be fraudulent. The experiments were fabricated. Mr. Hwang had to resign from the Seoul National University in March 2006 and apologise for his actions.

Missing link

The second story is about two British scientists. In 1912, Charles Dawson and Arthur Smith Woodward produced fragments of the skull of the so-called Piltdown Man, claimed to be discovered by workmen in gravel pits in Sussex.

They suggested that Piltdown man represented an evolutionary missing link between ape and man. It was after 40 years that the Piltdown Man was shown to be a composite forgery.

It was made out of a medieval human skull, the 500-year-old lower jaw of an orangutan, and chimpanzee fossil teeth.

The deception of Charles and Smith had gone unnoticed since they cleverly attempted to fill a gap in the history of man's evolution that had been worrying scientists.

Another story relates to "painting the mice," In 1974, William Summerlin, a top-ranking transplantation immunologist at Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre in New York, used a marker pen to make black patches of fur on white mice in an attempt to prove his new skin graft technique.

He claimed that there would be no rejection in his method. But he appeared on the front pages of newspapers, not as a discoverer but as a perpetrator of fraud. The expression "painting the mice" has come to mean fraud in research.

Exaggeration

Exaggeration of a result, disregarding counter-evidence, is as unhealthy as falsification of data or experiments. Deliberate misrepresentation of an inference and its perpetration will certainly land the fraudulent person in trouble. `Cutting corners,' a euphemism for taking wrong shortcuts or deliberate distortion of evidence, will have the same result.

Each institution will have its own code of conduct, which it will strive to preserve under all circumstances. You have to fall in line with the code without questioning it. Ethics is crucial in any educational activity including research.

It is likely that you come across articles of a general nature relating to your topic in popular journals.

The information contained in material of that kind might be unsupported or defective. Though you may follow up any clue from such articles, do not trust them as genuine for the purpose of your further research.

B.S. WARRIER