Improving knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the nursing faculty members and postgraduate students towards plagiarism in academic writing
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background and aim: Plagiarism is the use of concepts, words, manuscript and data without acknowledgment of the original source. It has become a worldwide problem, and a contentious matter in university education and research. The study aimed to improve knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the nursing faculty members and postgraduate students towards plagiarism in academic writing.Methods: A quasi-experimental (pre-post) design. Setting: The study was accomplished at the Nursing Faculty in Mansoura University. Sample: Convenient sample was used included 195 participants (100 nursing faculty members and 95 postgraduate students) of all nursing specialties who attended and completed the educational & training workshop. Tools: A structured Interviewing Schedule, Attitudes toward Plagiarism Scale and Plagiarism Scenario-Based Questionnaire.Results: The average score of the participants' knowledge and their practical scenario-solving scores about plagiarism were significantly increased after the training workshop compared to their levels before it. In addition, the average scores of the positive attitude, subjective norms and total attitudes score towards plagiarism were significantly decreased, while the average score of the negative attitude significantly increased after the training workshop in comparison to before it. Moreover, there was a statistically significant positive, moderate correlation between the participants’ knowledge score about plagiarism and their practical scenario-solving scores (r = 0.346, p ≤ .001). In addition, there was a significant positive mild correlation between the total knowledge score and the negative attitude of the studied sample towards plagiarism (r = 0.254, p ≤ .001).Conclusions: It was evident that there was a statistically significant improvement in knowledge and skills of the nursing faculty members and postgraduate students with a significant change in their attitudes towards plagiarism after implementation of the workshop. Recommendations: Providing continuing educational and training programs for the newly faculty members and researchers to improve their scientific writing skills, and research ethics and for highlighting plagiarism and its consequences.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».