Timeline for Is it unethical to cite a paper or book that you have never looked at?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 14, 2015 at 12:07 | comment | added | ShinTakezou | @TheDarkSide sorry for not having spotted the example was already done&discussed. Still on the matter, my pov: when I read a paper, I don't expect authors to have read all cited works. If I am concerned with how good are the grounds of arguments, and how much I can trust the judgement of the authors, I should check all the citation, even to see if they are cited correctly and if the refs in fact support the claims(fear contextomy!). If peer reviewed, I think I don't need to do so. Otherwise,... but anyway, I don't see it unethical, since all I need to "verify" the paper, is there. | |
| May 14, 2015 at 8:49 | comment | added | 299792458 | @ShinTakezou - That's dmckee's example below the question. I agree with the part about citing the citation, but as for the "anyway" bit - I agree it is going to be harmless (almost always), but can earn disrespect, as with my advisor's example. So, it is strictly speaking unethical, but harmlessly unethical. If you read the developments of this post in chronological order, so many people said it is harmless, but OP was hell bent upon asking whether it is ethical is his question. So, I obliged. :) | |
| May 14, 2015 at 8:44 | comment | added | ShinTakezou | Suppose paper A, which I've actually read, proves Z and uses "when X holds, then Y [1]". Now, let's suppose I need the claim for my paper B, as part of my argument, and also Z. I have to write "when X holds, then Y". Then, should I point to A, which I cite elsewhere for Z, or to 1? I'd go for 1, and I think it would be misleading to point to A (you go to A, just to discover it does not "prove" the claim, but cite 1...). Nonetheless, it'd be better to add a clue for the fact you're "citing a citation"; if you don't, anyway, I can't see any ethical issue. | |
| May 13, 2015 at 15:34 | comment | added | JeffE | Does that make me famous? — First, I would have to be famous. So, erm, no. :-) | |
| May 13, 2015 at 15:29 | comment | added | 299792458 | (temporary comment, will be deleted soon) - :: jumping up and down on the couch :: "OMG, @JeffE commented on my post. Does that make me famous?" | |
| May 13, 2015 at 15:26 | comment | added | JeffE | this seems to me a common practice — Indeed, but many common practices are unethical. | |
| May 13, 2015 at 15:08 | comment | added | Murphy | @TheDarkSide my issue is with conflating the 2 without establishing that in this case both actually apply.Taking up wearing a crown made of toilet roll tubes to all academic events may may you less credible but it's not unethical in any way. "Would I believe the claims of someone whom I've caught doing this?" has nothing to do with ethics as a measure. only credibility. Citing a source you haven't read with a claim about what it says may be somewhat unethical because it can propagate errors and false claims and it could also make the person less credible but one does not imply the other. | |
| May 13, 2015 at 14:50 | comment | added | 299792458 | @Murphy - In your example, credibility and ethics are in two different contexts. I'm speaking of the case when the same murderer is being unethical with respect to the measurements he's performing as well, and not just by the act of murdering. You are free to disagree. Have a good day :) | |
| May 13, 2015 at 14:43 | comment | added | Murphy | I do think you're conflating credibility and ethics when they're 2 very different things. Someone can be hideously unethical but still be credible. A murderer who documents the volume of screaming from victims in different scenarios is extremely unethical but may be utterly credible due to impeccable record keeping about their methods and recordings. On the other hand someone might be extremely ethical but fairly inept and incompetent making them not very credible. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 20:08 | comment | added | 299792458 | @KennyLJ - (Part 2 - A question of (a) vs (b)). - I don't disagree with your logic. But you repeatedly pressed the question - is it unethical? It is, in a strict sense! | |
| May 12, 2015 at 20:04 | comment | added | 299792458 | (contd.) You do that to your advisor, and it does bite you hard. It did, but that's just counting my miseries. But importantly, a feeling of trust was broken, and some disrespect entered the scene. People don't get caught doing this in presentations etc., because there are ways of chickening out. But when someone checks the nitty gritty (such as a group junior who is first going to rederive some results before doing his own) can always find out. | |
| May 12, 2015 at 20:00 | comment | added | 299792458 | @KennyLJ - (Part 1, Example) - I had the privilege of embarrassing my own advisor and a group senior in this manner. They had been citing a book as the source of a parameter input in 3-4 of their papers. My intentions weren't bad, I only told them in a group meeting (only 3 of us) that I was looking for it, but I couldn't find that source anywhere, so I requested them to hand it to me since they must be having it. They were both clearly embarrassed while disclosing that none of them had seen it. Some other source had mentioned it and they followed suite. (ofc, it came back to bite me later) | |
| May 12, 2015 at 19:39 | comment | added | user10885 | As mentioned, this seems to me a common practice. (Feel free to disagree.) Yet to my knowledge, no one has ever been left "red-faced". (But perhaps you can give me some examples of persons who have been thus embarrassed.) Why has no one (or few) ever been left "red-faced"? Is it because (a) it is difficult to conclusively prove that someone engaged in this practice; or (b) it really isn't a big deal? My feeling is that it is more (b) than (a). | |
| May 12, 2015 at 19:15 | history | edited | jakebeal | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
make intent clearer on last sentence
|
| May 12, 2015 at 19:10 | history | answered | 299792458 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |