So, I came across this paper in my field (let's call it paper A) and there was a reference for an equation that they had borrowed from another paper (let's call this paper B). Everything well-cited and fine so far. While reading through paper B (the one that they referred to), I noticed that paper A had also copied over the conclusions!
Obviously, it is very common that 2 papers reach to the exact same conclusions, but shouldn't it have been rephrased somehow? I am talking about 3 bullet-points like: "Factor X is proven to be more significant than Y, where the results in tables 6,7 indicate method 1 describes interactions and square terms better than method 2".
Numbers and indices are different, but the words are EXACTLY the same. Is that allowed, am I just being paranoid?
=== Edit ===
To clarify, by "exact same conclusions" I meant to say that both papers study the effect of a set of independent variables on a response variable. Both follow the same methodology and conclude to something like "A affects the response variable Y the most. Using methodology Z proves that the experimental procedure is faster and more accurate than any other algorithm." and so on.
The conclusion is more sort of qualitative discussion of their results, more than quantifying "A affects the response 83%, whereas B only 4%". But this description of the quality of the methodology (which is not novel but well-known by the way) has been copied over word-by-word from paper A.
They have repeated the experimental procedure of paper A slightly modified (because of the different equipment used), so it is normal to report different numbers throughout the paper. My question is whether they should be allowed to use the exact same sentences in the conclusion to describe the very very similar results they came to.