2025/02|The Paradox of Reuse: Why Even Copying Yourself Can Cross an Ethical Line
Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: Ethical Pitfalls and Practical Guidance
Plagiarism—presenting others’ ideas or text as your own—is a central ethical breach in scholarly publishing. Self-plagiarism (text recycling) is the reuse of your previously published work without proper citation or permission. Both undermine research integrity. This article explains the concepts, the reasons editors treat self-reuse as problematic, practical avoidance strategies, and detection tools commonly used by journals.
"If it isn’t common knowledge and it didn’t originate with you, it must be cited."
What is plagiarism?
Defining plagiarism
Plagiarism occurs when another person’s text, idea, data, figure, or structure is presented as original without clear attribution. It ranges from copying paragraphs verbatim to appropriating a distinctive line of reasoning.
Rule of thumb
When in doubt, cite: if information is not common knowledge and you did not produce it, provide a reference. Even short borrowings—single sentences or a distinctive phrase—should be attributed.
Self-plagiarism (text recycling): why it's problematic
Understanding self-plagiarism
Self-plagiarism—also called text recycling—happens when authors reuse substantial portions of their earlier writings without citation or disclosure. Because published work often transfers copyright to the publisher, the practice can also create legal problems.
Why editors object
- Inflated record: Recycling text can give a misleading picture of the novelty or quantity of a researcher's output.
- Copyright issues: Reusing text, tables, or figures originally published elsewhere may infringe the publisher’s rights.
- Redundancy: Repetition in the literature wastes space and complicates literature reviews and meta-analyses.
Practical guidance: how to avoid self-plagiarism
How to stay on the right side of ethics
Cite yourself
If you build upon or repeat prior results, cite your earlier publications clearly. Treat your prior work like any other source.
Rephrase and add value
Paraphrase methods or background, and—importantly—introduce new context, analysis, or interpretation. Avoid wholesale copying of entire sections.
Obtain permissions
When reusing large figures, tables, or verbatim text, check the original copyright and request permission if needed. Many publishers provide a reuse process.
Be transparent
In cover letters and manuscript notes, disclose overlap with earlier work and explain how the new submission offers novel contributions.
Prefer original writing
Where feasible, write fresh text. Even for standard methods, adapting description to the present study’s specifics improves clarity and avoids duplication.
Tools and thresholds used by journals
Similarity checks and journal workflows
Many journals use plagiarism-detection software (e.g., iThenticate, Turnitin, Crossref Similarity Check) to scan new submissions against published literature. Similarity reports flag overlapping text; editors then inspect context and intent.
Common practice: similarity index thresholds vary, but many editors scrutinize manuscripts with overall overlap scores above ~15–20% and investigate flagged passages.
Best practice
Run a pre-submission similarity check if available through your institution, and resolve or document any overlap before you submit.
Final thoughts
Conclusion
Honesty and transparency are the cornerstones of credible scholarship. Proper citation, careful paraphrasing, and transparency about reused material prevent both unintentional plagiarism and questionable self-reuse. When in doubt, cite and disclose.
References
- Roig, M. (2015). Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. Office of Research Integrity.
- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (n.d.). Guidelines on good publication practice. COPE Resources.
- Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. Accountability in Research, 18(3), 111–122.
- Graf, C., Wager, E., Bowman, A., Fiack, S., Scott-Lichter, D., & Robinson, A. (2007). Best practice guidelines on publication ethics: a publisher's perspective. International Journal of Clinical Practice, 61(s152), 1–26.