8

Subsequent publications rely on the exact same set of funding agencies. In total, that is an alphabet soup containing no less than 35 acronyms.

I'm using the exact same paragraph in the acknowledgements.

Would that be (self-)plagiarism?

It does seem to fit the definition, but... it seems silly to rewrite or to add a citation...

3
  • 29
    I'm waiting for the one that'll ask, whether the fact that his exact same name appears on all his papers, is considered (self-)plagiarism.
    – Ran G.
    Commented May 28, 2015 at 21:29
  • 2
    @RanG. Having an Umlaut in your name can give you a few variations ('ü', 'ue'), but ultimately it comes back to bite you :p
    – user4843
    Commented May 29, 2015 at 8:25
  • @RanG. I'm waiting for the one that'll claim, whether the fact that his exact same name appears on all his papers, is considered (self-)plagiarism. (Btw. is this plagiarism? ;)
    – A. Donda
    Commented Jul 17, 2015 at 18:04

2 Answers 2

17

If it is truly an ordered list of funders and grant numbers, then there is no original idea that you are plagiarising. It is like reusing a list of affiliations in the author list. If you are describing how each person/funder/agency contributed, then there might be some originality in the statements and the exact contribution potentially changed between studies.

1
  • 17
    Not only is it not self-plagiarism, but often funding agencies will require a particular exact wording in the acknowledgements.
    – jakebeal
    Commented May 28, 2015 at 20:49
12

Nobody should care if the acknowledgments section of a paper is reused from a previous paper you have written. There is no proprietary "intellectual content" in an acknowledgments section, so you are not stealing anybody else's work.

It would be inappropriate (and very odd), however, to use someone else's acknowledgments as your own.

2
  • What if they happen to have the exact same set of funding agencies?
    – A. Donda
    Commented Jul 17, 2015 at 18:06
  • Funding agency statements are formulaic, and are therefore not considered plagiarism.
    – aeismail
    Commented Jul 17, 2015 at 21:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .