Experimental research designs require the comparison of two kinds of groups: the experimental group and the control group. The differences between the groups are in their purposes. Any experiment is looking to test a characteristic, often referred to as a variable, to see if that characteristic explains the phenomenon the experimenter is studying. So at the very least, each qualitative experiment has an experimental group—the group possessing the characteristic being tested—and the control group, which is meant to represent those without the characteristic, or the average population. Another way of looking at the differences is that the control group isn’t manipulated by the researchers, while the experimental group is (Feldman, 2013, p.33).
The major benefit of dividing a population sample into experimental groups and control groups is that the researcher or research team can identify what is causing the phenomenon, or in the case of multiple experimental groups, which factor is contributing most to the phenomenon being studied. Without the presence of a control group to compare results with, researchers would be unable to say exactly what caused the phenomenon they are studying—whether it actually was the variable that the experimental group demonstrated, or other random factors. Having a control group that does not change is vital for identifying what changes took place during the experiment (Feldman, 2013, p. 33).
Plagiarism is the act of taking the work, ideas, or expressed thoughts of another person and passing them off as one’s own. In an academic setting, this typically means not citing outside sources in one’s papers. This does not typically apply to information gleaned from reference works, such as dictionaries and encyclopedias (Purdue OWL, 2016). Also, one’s own original work—personal experiences, experiments wherein one was a primary researcher, one’s own creative work, etc.—do not need to be cited. Neither do assumptions that are commonly accepted within the general public; one does not need to find a source to demonstrate that ice is cold.
That said, if the rule is that “if it’s not yours, you have to cite it”, would it be all right to copy and paste from other authors, as long as one cites the information according to whatever convention he or she is supposed to use? Absolutely not. Such behavior is not acceptable, for three basic reasons. First among these is that in the case of most collegiate papers, the instructor is grading on a process, not merely an end product. That is to say, the teacher is more interested in the synthesis between what other authors have already discovered and one’s own point of view rather than a presentation of already-known facts without any critical thinking involved. In this vein, since one is not presenting his or her own informed idea, but rather the ideas of other people while claiming the paper is his or her own work, such a paper could be considered an instance of plagiarism. A second reason this could be thought of as plagiarism is that in scientific papers, a thorough literature review is supposed to be written almost entirely via paraphrase with correct citing, leading to the critical point the author is trying to research. Copying and pasting one’s literature review, data, methodology, results, conclusions, etc. not only invalidates the entire assignment in and of itself, but also could be looked on as plagiarism because the student did not do any investigation on his or her own; instead, he or she is representing an amalgamation of other researchers’ work as his or her own and calling it their own work. A third reason is that in the case of a copy-and-paste job, even if it is properly cited, could be considered plagiarism is because the student has no involvement in the paper itself. Without the author’s direction towards a central point—if the author has no buy-in on the paper—he or she has no involvement in it and therefore any work turned in, properly cited or no, is inherently not his or hers to claim as his or her own. It is plagiarism at the basic conceptual level as soon as the student puts his or her name on it.
References
Feldman, R.S. (2013). Essentials of Understanding Psychology (10th ed). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Purdue OWL. Purdue University. (2016). Is it plagiarism yet? Purdue Online Writing Lab.
Retrieved from https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/589/02/.
