A critical discussion of the publication by Nasrullah Memon, David L. Hicks, Nicholas Harkiolakis and Abdul Qadeer Khan Rajput: Small World Terrorist Networks: A Preliminary Investigation
The analysis presented here (as of 30 January, 2014), including all documented findings of plagiarism, is available for →download.
The pages 339-344 of the paper have been analyzed. Page 344, however, almost only contains the list of references.
Clicking on the respective page number in the table above leads to the documentation of the text parallels on the corresponding page.
Pages in light grey contain no documented plagiarism. On pages coloured in dark blue between 0% and 50% of the text is plagiarized, on pages coloured in dark red between 50% and 75% of the text is plagiarized.
The following chart illustrates the amount and the distribution of the findings of text parallels. The colours show the type of plagiarism diagnosed:
- rot="Verschleierung": the source of the text parallel is not given, the copied text will be somewhat modified.
- gelb="Bauernopfer": the source of the text parallel is mentioned, but the extent and/or closeness of the copying is not made clear by the reference.
Prominent findings of plagiarism
- Fragment 340 01: A passage is taken verbatim from a source that is not mentioned anywhere in the paper. The authors quote the first author's PhD thesis, which, however, was published after the source.
- Fragment 342 01: A fairly long passage is taken almost verbatim from a source that is named at the end of the passage. However, it is not clear to the reader at all, that the entire passage (in which more references are given) is taken from this source.
- Currently there are 7 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 4 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 3 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
- The publication has 6 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 4 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 66.7%. The 6 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 25% of the main part of the publication.
- In all, text was taken from 3 sources.
Some of the text of the paper has been presented by the authors previously:
- Section 3 and the beginning of section 4 (p.341: 29-39; p.342: all) can also be found in Memon et al. (2007c) (retracted)
- Almost the entire section 1 (introduction: p.339: 19-40; p. 340: 1-26) can also be found in: Memon et al. (2007e) (retracted)
- Fragments showing plagiarism (5)
- All sources (3)
- All fragments
- All Wiki-pages related to this documentation
- The extensive documentation of N. Memon's PhD thesis including an overview of all his terrorism-related publications up to 2011.
- Nm2, Nm3, Nm5, Nm6, Nm7: The documentation of plagiarism in other papers of the authors.
- Press and Blog mentions related to this case
- General Press listings related to VroniPlag Wiki and its cases
- In the VroniPlag Wiki Chat questions are answered regarding this case and regarding the wiki in general. Please introduce yourself, at times you may have to keep the chat open and wait a while until someone answers, generally evenings German time (UTC +1).