- Problematic text parallels can be found in the following chapters (state of analysis: 25 Mar 2014):
- Chapter I – Literature Review
- 1.2 Context
- 1.2.1 Anatomy and Connectivity of the Declarative Memory (p. 7-13): pages 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
- 1.2.2 The Hippocampus, Context and Episodic Memory (p. 14-19): pages 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
- 1.2.3 Context-Dependent Memory in Human-based Research (p. 19-23): pages 20, 23
- 1.2.4 Context Recognition: The Key to Reconsolidation (p. 23-28): pages 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 – [almost completely]
- 1.3 Stress
- 1.3.1 The Hippocampus and Stress (p. 28-30): pages 28, 29, 30
- 1.3.2 The Physiology of the Stress Response (p. 30-36): pages 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36
- 1.3.3 Stress and Memory: Animal Studies (p. 36): page 36 – [almost completely]
- 1.3.4 Stress and Memory: Human Studies (p. 37-41): pages 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 – [almost completely]
- 1.3.5 Stress and Context-Dependent Memory (p. 41-44): pages 41, 42, 43
- Chapter II – Methods: Behavioural, Electrophysiological and Biochemical
- 2.1 Control Tasks
- 2.1.1 National Adult Reading Test (NART) (p. 58-59): page 58
- 2.2 Visual Paired-Associates (VPA) Task (p. 60-61): page 60
- 2.3 Electrophysiological Analysis
- 2.4 The Stress Task
- 2.4.1 Trier Social Stress Task (TSST) (p. 85-87): pages 85, 86
- 2.4.2 Measuring Emotional and Behavioural Response
- 2.4.3 Measuring Hormonal Variation in the HPA Response
- Chapter III – Behavioural correlates of local versus global contextual processing in episodic memory retrieval
- Chapter III – Electrophysiological correlates of local contextual processing in episodic memory
- 4.4 Discussion (p. 192-203): page 201
- Chapter V – Behavioural and electrophysiological differentiation of memory consolidation, reconsolidation and updating in human episodic memory
- Chapter VI – The effect of stress and context on reconsolidation of episodic hippocampally-based memory in humans
- Chapter VII – General Discussion
- 7.2 [toc:] Overview and Discussion of Findings emanating from Context Studies / [text:] Context (p. 339-348): pages 341, 343, 344, 345
- 7.3 Overview & Discussion of Findings: Reconsolidation in Episodic Memory in Humans (p. 348-354): pages 349, 350, 351
- 7.4 Broader Implications and Future Directions (p. 354-358): page 358.
- Beckner (2004): There are substantial text parallels with a dissertation that is not mentioned anywhere in Jm's thesis. The publication Beckner et al. (2006), which is related to the dissertation Beckner (2004), is mentioned at times but is the source of substantial unattributed text parallels nevertheless.
- Lee (2009): The entire chapter 1.4 ("Function of Reconsolidation, Boundary Conditions & Distinguishing Characteristics", pages 44-52) is taken from this source with minor adaptations, including a comprehensive body of references to the literature. Lee (2009) is mentioned six times throughout the chapter, but always only as reference for isolated statements and without any indication that the whole chapter might come from this source.
- Scanlon et al. (2006): Substantial text has been copied from this source that is not mentioned in the entire thesis. In particular section 2.3.3 (pages 65-70) is taken from there in its entirety. It is worth mentioning that the third author of this publication is also the research supervisor of the thesis, which makes one wonder whether he accepted the text parallels or did not notice them.
- Nadel (2008): Much of the description of the work of Nadel et al. is taken from this source. In particular section 1.2.4 (pages 23-27) is taken from there in its entirety.
- Fragment 035 01: A whole page is copied almost verbatim without any reference to the source. Also 5 references to other publications have been copied. See also: Fragment 036 01
- Fragment 274 14: A passage that describes the outcome of the research undertaken is copied verbatim without attribution, including a phrase starting with: "We herein demonstrate that [...]". Similarly here: Fragment 351 01
- Fragment 045 01: An example, where the source is given, but in a way that leaves the reader completely in the dark about the fact that the entire page is taken from that source.
- Fragment 064 01: A verbatim copy without any mention of the source. A list of similar fragments can be found here.
- There are substantial text parallels between the thesis and Moore Roche 2007 (retracted), most, but not all of which can be found in chapter 1 of the thesis. There is, however, a note at the beginning of Chaper 1: "Part of this chapter has been published:" together with a reference to this publication. These text parallels have not been documented.
- There are numerous publications mentioned in the text of the thesis that are not listed in the bibliography and therefore cannot be identified easily, e.g.:
- "Gregg and colleagues (1999)" (page 305)
- "Pugh and colleagues (1997)" (page 332)
- "Tronel and colleagues (2005)" (page 44)
- "Pedreira and colleagues (2004)" (page 49)
- "Doniger and colleagues (2000)" (Page 71)
- "Polit and colleagues (2008)" (page 123)
- "Lamy and colleagues (2009)" (page 195)
- "Van Hoof (2005)" (page 195)
- "Frankland and colleagues (2006)" (page 242)
- There are sentences and groups of sentences that appear more than once in the thesis. Among them are passage taken from different authors without attribution, see e.g.:
- Some fragments are currently not classified as violating citation rules, but might still show problematic text use. See here.
- The NUI's policies regarding plagiarism can be found here.
- Currently there are 125 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 100 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 25 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
- The publication has 358 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 98 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 27.4%. The 358 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 13% of the main part of the publication.
- In all, text was taken from 38 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: 8 Mar 2014)