Conceptualizing the Phenomenon of Academic Borrowing within the Knowledge Management Paradigm

The lack of consensus regarding quantitative measures for assessing text originality gives rise to the problem of interpreting the results generated by algorithms of information systems designed to detect academic borrowing in texts, as well as the comparability of expert evaluations of the originality of intellectual outputs. The aim of this study is to reveal the nature and essence of the phenomenon of academic borrowing through the methodology of knowledge management. The author considers quality management of the work performed by research units as a new function of knowledge management capable of regulating the quality of scientific knowledge. An original interpretation of the nature and essence of academic borrowing is proposed, distinguishing between its epistemological nature and its ethical-deontological essence. It is demonstrated that the contemporary (1990–2025) discourse on academic borrowing has been shaped by digital transformation and comprises approximately sixty definitions, which the author classifies into three groups. This inventory is conducted with a view to constructing a systematic terminological framework for academic borrowing. The findings of the study may be useful to specialists in general issues of the science of science and epistemology; in management studies, particularly in the field of knowledge management, including the organization and supervision of research activities; in the regulation of copyright and intellectual property rights; in the preparation, editing, and processing of academic texts; and to faculty members, students, and postgraduate researchers engaged in these areas, as well as to all those who require skills in academic writing.

1. Chirkin E.S. Automated test systems for illegal borrowing. Vestnik Tambovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki = Bulletin of Tambov University. Series: The Humanities. 2013;(12):164-174. (In Russ.).

2. Zvonnikova Е.D. Comparison of information systems of automatic check of original texts. Nauchno metodicheskii elektronnyi zhurnal “Kontsept” = Scientific and Methodological Electronic Journal “Koncept”. 2015;(8):126-130. URL: http://e-koncept.ru/2015/15282.htm. (In Russ.).

3. Drucker P.F. Managing the knowledge worker. Modern Office Procedures. 1979;(24):12-16.

4. Drucker P.F. The age of social transformation. The Atlantic Monthly. 1994; 274(5):53-80. URL: https://www. theatlantic.com/past/docs/politics/ecbig/soctrans.htm

5. Drucker P.F. Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California Management Review. 1999;41(2):79-94. DOI: 10.2307/41165987

6. Drucker P.F. Managing oneself. Harvard Business Review. 2005;77(2):64-74. URL: https://hbr.org/2005/01/managing-oneself

7. Grant R.M. Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 1996;17(S2):109-122. DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250171110

8. Orekhova S.V., Nikitina O.M. Knowledge management: Any changes in the research agenda? Upravlencheskie nauki = Management Sciences. 2024;14(1):103-116. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/2404-022X 2024-14-1-103-116

9. Lunev A.P., Tomashevskaya Yu.N., Koshkarov A.V. Knowledge management in higher education: Theory and practice. Upravlencheskie nauki = Management Sciences. 2022;12(2):86-97. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.26794/2304-022X-2022-12-2-86-97

10. Tikhomirov V.P., Dneprovskaya N.V. Knowledge management system as a university digital transformation environment on the case of MESI. Informatsionnoe obshchestvo = Information Society. 2022;(5):44-57. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.52605/16059921_2022_05_44

11. Khegay E.V., Babak L.N., Filatkina M.D., Filatkina I.D. Knowledge management at the higher education institution as a factor of academic entrepreneurship development. Kreativnaya ekonomika = Journal of Creative Economy. 2017;11(1):45-60. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.18334/ce.11.1.37267

12. Ignat’eva E.Yu. Knowledge management in the quality management of the educational process in higher education. Veliky Novgorod: Novgorod State University; 2008. 280 p. (In Russ.).

13. Milner B.Z. Knowledge management. Moscow: INFRA-M; 2003. 178 p. (In Russ.).

14. Leonard D.A., Sensiper S. The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. California Management Review. 1998;40(3):112-132. DOI: 10.2307/41165946

15. Raskov V.E. Knowledge management as an independent field of research: The main controversial issues. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Menedzhment = Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Management Series. 2007;(3):34-58. (In Russ.).

16. Leonard D.A., Straus S. Putting your company’s whole brain to work. In: Leonard D. Managing knowledge assets, creativity and innovation. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.; 2004:287-299. DOI: 10.1142/9789814295505_0012 (Russ. ed.: Leonard D.A., Straus S. Kak zastavit’ rabotat’ kollektivnyi mozg kompanii. In: Upravlenie znaniyami. Moscow: Alpina Business Books; 2006:64-91.).

17. Spender J.-C., Scherer A.G. The philosophical foundations of knowledge management: Editors’ introduction. Organization. 2007;14(1):5-28. DOI: 10.1177/1350508407071858

18. Reformatsky A.A. Thoughts on terminology. Modern problems of Russian terminology. Moscow: Nauka; 1986. 199 p. (In Russ.).

19. Lebedev S.A. Pluralism of scientific truths and their criteria. Vestnik Severo-Vostochnogo federal’nogo universiteta im. M.K. Ammosova. Seriya: Pedagogika, psikhologiya, filosofiya = Vestnik of North-Eastern Federal University. Pedagogics. Psychology. Philosophy. 2020;(4):133-143. (In Russ.).

20. Spender J.-C. Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal. 1996;17:45-62. DOI: 10.1002/smj.4250171106

21. Spender J.-C. Pluralist epistemology and the knowledge-based theory of the firm. Organization. 1998;5(2):233-256.

22. Merton R.K. Resistance to the systematic study of multiple discoveries in science. European Journal of Sociology. 1963;4(2):237-282. DOI: 10.1017/S0003975600000801

23. Ostrovskaya А.S. Plagiarism in the XXI century: Who needs it? Voprosy sovremennoi pediatrii = Current Pediatrics. 2016;15(2):148-153. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.15690/vsp.v15i2.1532

24. Kotlyarov I.D. Plagiarism in scientific publications. Nauchnaya periodika: problemy i resheniya = Scholarly Communication Review. 2011;(4):6-12. (In Russ.).

25. Kuleshova A.V., Chekhovich Yu.V., Belenkaya O.S. Walking the razor’s edge: How to avoid self-plagiarism when you recycle your texts. Nauchnyi redaktor i izdatel’ = Science Editor and Publisher. 2019;4(1-2):45-51. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24069/2542-0267-2019-1-2-45-51

26. Levin V.I. Plagiarism, its essence and measures to prevent and handle it. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii = Higher Education in Russia. 2018;27(1):143-150. (In Russ.).

27. Gelfand M.S. Plagiarism in dissertations. Obrazovanie i nauka = Education and Science Journal. 2018;20(3):160-181. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2018-3-160-181

28. Pislyakov V.V. Self-citation and its impact on scientific workflow assessment: The review of publications. Part I. Nauchnye i tekhnicheskie biblioteki = Scientific and Technical Libraries. 2022;(2):49-70. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.33186/1027-3689-2022-2-49-70

29. Westbrook J.H. Identifying significant research. Science. 1960;132(3435):1229-1234. DOI: 10.1126/science.132.3435.1229

30. Tagliacozzo R. Self-citations in scientific literature. Journal of Documentation. 1977;33(4):251-265. DOI: 10.1108/eb026644

31. Raisig L.M. World biomedical journals, 1951-60: A study of the relative significance of 1,388 titles indexed in Current List of Medical Literature. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association. 1966;54(2):108-125.

32. Earle P., Vickery B. Social science literature use in the UK as indicated by citations. Journal of Documentation. 1969;25(2):123-141. DOI: 10.1108/eb026468

33. Narin F., Pinski G., Gee H.H. Structure of the biomedical literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 1976;27(1):25-45. DOI: 10.1002/asi.4630270104

34. Zhou Y. Self-citation and citation of top journal publishers and their interpretation in the journal discipline context. Scientometrics. 2021;126(7):6013-6040. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-021-03995-y

35. Wallmark J.T., Eckerstein S., Langered B., Holmqvist H.E.S. Increase in efficiency with size of research teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management. 1973;EM-20(3):80-86. DOI: 10.1109/TEM.1973.6448434

36. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., van Raan A.F.J. A comparative study of bibliometric past performance analysis and peer judgement. Scientometrics. 1985;8(3-4):149-159. DOI: 10.1007/BF02016933

37. Moed H.F., Burger W.J.M., Frankfort J.G., Van Raan A.F.J. The use of bibliometric data for the measurement of university research performance. Research Policy. 1985;14(3):131-149. DOI: 10.1016/0048-7333(85)90012-5

38. Minasny B., Hartemink A.E., McBratney A. Individual, country, and journal selfcitation in soil science. Geoderma. 2010;155(3-4):434-438. DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2009.12.003

39. Shehatta I., Al-Rubaish A.M. Impact of country self-citations on bibliometric indicators and ranking of most productive countries. Scientometrics. 2019;120(2):775-791. DOI: 10.1007/s11192-019-03139-3

40. Schubert A., Glänzel W., Thijs B. The weight of author self-citations. A fractional approach to self-citation counting. Scientometrics. 2006;67(3):503-514. DOI: 10.1556/Scient.67.2006.3.11

41. Flatt J.W., Blasimme A., Vayena E. Improving the measurement of scientific success by reporting a self citation index. Publications. 2017;5(3):20. DOI: 10.3390/publications5030020

42. Singh A.J. Plagiarising plagiarism. Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 2007;32(1):5-6. DOI: 10.4103/0970-0218.53379

43. Howard R.M.A Plagiarism pentimento. The Journal of Teaching Writing.1992;11(2):233-245. URL: https://www.citationproject.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Howard-Plagiarism-Pentimento.pdf

44. Das N., Panjabi M. Plagiarism: Why is it such a big issue for medical writers? Perspectives in Clinical Research. 2011;2(2):67-71. DOI: 10.4103/2229-3485.80370