- Problematic text parallels can be found in the following chapters (state of analysis: 10.05.2014):
- Material and methods [beginning] (p. 20): page 20 – [completely]
- Electrophysiological recordings (p. 20): page 20 – [completely (literally)]
- Induction of neocortical SD (p. 20-21): page 20 – [completely (literally)]
- Long-term potentiation (p. 21): page 21 – [completely (literally)]
- Experimental protocols (p. 21): page 21 – [completely]
- Statistical analysis (p. 22): page 22 – [completely]
- Discussion (p. 28-31): page 31.
- Haarmann (2009): Substantial parts of the introduction and the methods section have been taken from a dissertation that has been supervised by the same supervisor.
- Wikipedia Garlic (2010): some short passages of the introduction section have been taken from the Wikipedia.
- The supervisor of the thesis Prof. Dr. Gorji was also supervisor of the thesis Haarmann (2009), so it would have been possible for him to spot the very substantial text parallels between the dissertation Clm (2010) and Haarmann (2009).
- The regulations for the submission of dissertations in effect at the time demand a declaration accompanying the thesis that "die Doktorandin/ der Doktorand sie nur unter Benutzung der im Literaturverzeichnis angegebenen Quellen angefertigt hat und sonst kein anderes gedrucktes oder ungedrucktes Material verwendet wurde" (§2 (1) 4.)
- It seems surprising that a doctoral degree in dentistry ("doctor medicinae dentium" according to cover page) is granted for a thesis studying neural mechanisms in the rat brain.
- The supervisor of the thesis Prof. Dr. Gorji is co-author of the publication "Effects of garlic extract on spreading depression in rat neocortical tissue", Journal of Birjand University of Medical Sciences, 2011; 18(4): 231 - 241 (available online). This article was received on August 21, 2010 which is nearly three months before the day of the oral exam. According to the abstract the experiments appear to be substantially identical to those of the thesis. The results also appear to be substantially the same, cf. the figures on page 5 which are very similar to Figure 4 of the thesis (note however the different units). The thesis does not contain a reference to this article. The list of references of the article does not contain a reference to the thesis. It is not possible to know whether Clm was aware of this parallel study. But the supervisor should have told Clm about this parallel experiment and the thesis should have contained at least a reference to this article.
- The supervisor of the thesis Prof. Dr. Gorji is co-author of the publication Bayan et al. (2013). This publication does not mention the dissertation Clm (2010), but shows some overlapping text with it that is unattributed.
- Currently there are 31 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 24 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 6 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
- The publication has 27 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 17 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 63%. The 27 analyzed pages break down with respect to the amount of text parallels encountered as follows:
- From these statistics an extrapolation of the amount of text of the publication under investigation that has been documented as problematic can be estimated (conservatively) as about 36% of the main part of the publication.
- In all, text was taken from 15 sources.
The following chart illustrates the extent and the distribution of the text parallels found. The colours show the type of violation of citation rules diagnosed:
- grau="Komplettplagiat" (copy & paste): the source of the text parallel is not given, the copy is verbatim.
- rot="Verschleierung" (disguised copy): the source of the text parallel is not given, the copied text will be somewhat modified.
- gelb="Bauernopfer" (pawn sacrifice): the source of the text parallel is mentioned, but the extent and/or the closeness of the copy to the source is not made clear by the reference.
(state of analysis: 10.05.2014)