A critical discussion of the publication by Nasrullah Memon, Henrik Legind Larsen, David L. Hicks, and Nicholas Harkiolakis: Detecting Hidden Hierarchy in Terrorist Networks: Some Case StudiesBearbeiten
The analysis presented here (as of 30 January, 2014), including all documented findings of plagiarism, is available for [ →download TO COME].
The pages 477-488 of the paper have been analyzed. Page 489 contains only part of the bibliography and has been excluded:
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 and on pages coloured in light red more than 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:
- grau="Komplettplagiat": the source of the text parallel is not given, the copy is verbatim.
- 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 plagiarismBearbeiten
- Fragment 479 12: a passage is taken verbatim from the source without attribution.
- Ressler (2006): About a page is copied more or less verbatim from this source, which is mentioned only once in the beginning without any indication of the extent of copied material.
- Significant text has been copied 1-to-1 from the Wikipedia without a quotation being marked (see the Wikipedia articles "2004 Madrid train bombings", "7 July 2005 London bombings", "Bojinka plot"). As the sources are mentioned in a way that could be interpreted as reference for a close text parallel, those problematic findings have not been classified as plagiarism ("keine Wertung").
- Currently there are 16 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 11 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 5 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
- The publication has 12 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 6 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 50%. The 12 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 15% of the main part of the publication.
- In all, text was taken from 12 sources.
Some of the text of the paper has been presented by the authors previously: [TO COME]
Some of the text of the paper has been recycled by the authors afterwards:
- Fragments showing plagiarism (13)
- All Sources (12)
- 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, Nm4, Nm5, 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).
- Ungesichtete Fragmente: Plagiat (0)
- Ungesichtete Fragmente: Verdächtig / Keine Wertung (6)
- Ungesichtete Fragmente: Kein Plagiat (0)
Aufgabe: Schützen (nur Administratoren)
Bearbeitung vorerst abgeschlossen: