| 当前位置: 首页 >> 媒介批评 >> Chinese researchers debate rash of plagiarism case |
| |
| Chinese researchers debate rash of plagiarism case |
|
|
作者： Li Xiguang and Xiong Lei
来源：
发表时间：2006-02-26
浏览次数： 字号：大 中 小 |
Source: Science, Oct 18, 1996 v274 n5286 p337(2).
Title: Chinese researchers debate rash of plagiarism cases.
Author: Li Xiguang and Xiong Lei
Abstract: The scientific community in China is concerned about three cases
of blatant plagiarism by Chinese scientists that have been exposed since 1993.
One of the scientists involved blamed his actions on his poor English skills.
Beijing - Chinese scientists are working hard to be internationally
competitive in basic research. But the country may have already caught up with
the rest of the world in one measure of modern science - scientific
misconduct. Three recent cases of plagiarism have triggered a vigorous public
discussion of the problem and how institutions should respond.
Similar discussions have been a staple in the West for more than a decade. But
in China they are also tinged with concern that poor language skills may
influence a scientist's ethical conduct, not to mention the scientist's
ability to compete internationally. Indeed, the first national airing of one
case, a recent article in a prominent journal affiliated with the Chinese
Academy of Sciences (CAS), acknowledges those additional demands on Chinese
scientists in its title: "A Problem of English or of Science Morality?"
The article, in the August issue of The Journal of Dialectics of Nature,
discusses the case of Pan Aihua, who worked in the National Laboratory of
Protein Engineering and Plant Genetic Engineering, College of Life Sciences,
Peking University. In In 1994, he and five co-authors published a paper in a
Dutch-based journal, Plant Molecular Biology (PMB), on efforts to genetically
manipulate the resistance to heavy metals of tobacco and other agriculturally
important plants (vol. 24, p. 341).
In their August article, biologists Li Peishan, former deputy director of the
CAS Institute for Natural Science History, and Xue Pangao, former senior
engineer of the CAS Bureau of Biological logical Science and Technology, note
that nearly one-third of the PMB text is identical to a 1989 paper by two
Canadian researchers (Theoretical Applied Genetics, vol.78, p. 161). They add
that, because the PMB authors work in a national laboratory funded by the
State High-Technology Program, "the act of plagiarism has gone beyond an
individual's responsibility and has damaged our country's scientific
reputation." Interest in the case has been heightened by the fact that one of
the co-authors is Chen Zhangliang, the university's vice president and one of
the country's most prominent young molecular biologists.
The incident first came to light, say Peking University sources, after Santosh
Misra of the University of Victoria, British Columbia, alerted the journal to
"disturbing" similarities between Pan's paper and her 1989 article. The PMB
editor, Robert Schilperoot of Leiden University in the Netherlands, then wrote
Pan that he "cannot do otherwise than support the view of Dr. Misra" that
plagiarism had been committed.
Pan and Ru Binggen, his mentor and co-author, defended the paper in a reply to
Schilperoot. "There is a significant degree of identity in the wording," they
admitted, but the charge of plagiarism is not valid "because we have all the
original data."
Schilperoot accepted an invitation from Peking University to investigate the
matter and then presented his conclusions in an editorial (PMB, vol. 28, p.
v.). Although he found that the data in the PMB paper are "from original work
carried out in Prof. Ru's laboratory over several years," Schilperoot adds
that "it is not acceptable practice to copy text - not even small passages -
from published materials without reference." In the wake of the inquiry, Pan
was removed from his research position at the College of Life Sciences and
named general manager of a university-owned biotechnology company based in the
southern economic boomtown of Shenzhen. He maintains that his actions were a
result of his limited knowledge of English and were not a breach of scientific
ethics.
Speaking recently with Science, Schilperoot says Peking University officials
told him they "were worried this sort of plagiarism happens a lot" and that
they are eager to root out such practices. "Some Chinese scientists think that
they can't compete equally in Western journals because of a problem with
English," he says. "So they like to copy what others have done and then fill
in what is new.... To many people, what was done is not considered an
aberration but part of an attitude that says it's OK to copy as long as you've
done the work yourself."
The investigation was an administrative hot potato for Chen, a co-author on
the paper as well as the official in charge of overseeing the outside inquiry.
"I think it was a mistake for him to be a co-author without looking more
closely at the paper," says Schilperoot. Chen was not available for comment,
but his colleagues say that he has told them he does not remember the paper
and that his contribution was minor. At the same time, Schilperoot gives Chen
high marks for making sure that he had access to the relevant people and
materials for his investigation. "Dr. Chen was very careful not to interfere,"
says Schilperoot. "I think he's part of the new generation that is pushing to
adopt Western standards."
Repeat performances. The Pan case is the third incident since 1993 of
apparently blatant plagiarism by Chinese scientists. The first involved Li
Fubin, then a lecturer in physics at China Mining University at Xuzhou in
eastern China's Jiangsu province. In his pursuit of promotion to associate
professor, Li copied the whole text of a paper co-authored by a Turkish
professor and an Italian scholar from a physics journal published in Italy. Li
then submitted the copied article, under a new title, to a Swiss physics
journal, which published it in 1990.
The scandal was first exposed by He Zuoxiu and Hao Bailin, two leading Chinese
theoretical physicists, in Chinese Science News, a triweekly publication of
CAS. Their investigation revealed that two of the 25 papers Li claimed he had
published in foreign academic journals when applying for promotion and funding
were identical to previously published papers, and the rest were fictitious.
Li later confessed to his misconduct and issued a personal apology in the
newspaper. The repercussions were severe: The National Natural Science
Foundation (NNSF) declared that he was permanently ineligible for funding, and
the university stripped him of his title and put him on probation for a year.
Li then quit and left academic research.
The second case of alleged plagiarism, also exposed by Chinese Science News
earlier this year, involved Wang Ruidan, an associate professor of physics in
Hunan Normal University, Changsha. According to the investigation by
university authorities and Chinese Science News, Wang copied six papers
already published by Ma Dongping of the physics department of Sichuan Union
University and submitted them last fall to the Journal of Chemistry and
Physics, where Ma saw them while reviewing manuscripts at the request of the
Chinese journal's editor.
Ma wrote to both the newspaper and the university. As a result of their
investigation, Wang was demoted to lecturer and his false "achievements" were
erased from his files. Explaining the punishment, Jiang Fasheng, vice chair of
the physics department of Hunan Normal University, says "we all agree that
plagiarism is a shameless act. But Wang used to be a hard-working teacher, and
demotion is quite a severe punishment for him."
What to do. Although Chinese officials took swift action in these cases, there
is no consensus on the best way to reduce or eliminate such unethical
behavior. Part of the reason, as is true around the world, is the difficulty
of knowing the extent of the problem.
Chen-Lu Tsou, a member of CAS and honorary director of the national laboratory
of Biomacromolecules in Beijing, believes that those involved in plagiarism
and other acts of misconduct "are very few in number." But Fan Hongye, a
research fellow with the CAS Institute of Science Policy and Managerial
Science who has been studying the issue, says that the incidence of misconduct
is not clear because "nobody has conducted a survey." As for the likely
reasons behind such conduct, a 1992 poll by Fan of 530 scientists, science
journal editors, and research program officers offered these familiar
explanations: "to seek instant fame, or to maintain or be promote |
|
[1] [2] |
| 责任编辑 sysop |
|
|
|
 |
发表评论 |
|
|
|
请遵守《互联网电子公告服务管理规定》及中华人民共和国其他各项有关法律法规。
严禁发表危害国家安全、损害国家利益、破坏民族团结、破坏国家宗教政策、破坏社会稳定、侮辱、诽谤、教唆、淫秽等内容的评论 。
用户需对自己在使用本站服务过程中的行为承担法律责任（直接或间接导致的）。
本站管理员有权保留或删除评论内容。
评论内容只代表网友个人观点，与本网站立场无关。 |
|
|
|
|
| ::热点文章:: |
|
|
| ::推荐文章:: |
|
|
| ::最新文章:: |
|
|
|
发表评论
打印本文
推荐本文
加入收藏
返回顶部
关闭窗口
