作者查詢 / uka123ily
作者 uka123ily 在 PTT [ PhD ] 看板的留言(推文), 共494則
限定看板:PhD
看板排序:
全部gay8145Christianity6532PublicIssue3488GUNDAM2857Gossiping2595AfterPhD1637NTU1457W-Philosophy1328Master_D1225SENIORHIGH1142Education1139Policy1130PhD494TKU_Talk432LGBT_SEX426Tokusatsu421SRW316L_BoyMeetsGi268graduate204lesbian201textbook174MAC173IA169HumService152Teacher151MH148marriage127C_Chat121L_TalkandCha106Espannol103MobileComm75CCU_talk74Catholic61Channel_V59GossipPicket51medstudent47Ancient38About_Life36J-PopStation36JesusLove35feminine_sex30Falcom29SYSOP28C_ChatBM27Feminism27NCCU09_PHILO27Brethren26HSNU_114226movie26Buddhism25DragonQuest25FinalFantasy25SHENA-RINGO25haiku23Aviation22creditcard22iOS22SW_Job22transgender22Confucianism21FLAT_CLUB21NDS21NSwitch21TKU_CME96B19FJU18iPod18Seiya17DIGIMON16media-chaos15PSP-PSV15Sandy14EqualRights13CrossStrait12Macross12Militarylife12NCCU08_Ethno12nCoV201912sex12bi-sexual11BraveSaga11LAW11GreenParty10Marxism10RESIT10Sociology10TO-LesQu10ck-talk9model9PUBLICISS_PT9AU_Talk8KMT8LatinAmerica8PCSH91_3058pet8Salary8study8AC_In7AdvEduUK7book7cat7CSMU-CM-OP7KOU7medache7MEI-CHYI7SuperStarAve7Utada7Violation7Asexual6digitalk6HatePolitics6Health_Life6L_HappyLivin6LoL6TKU-Strategy6BookService5CSMU-MED975Ecophilia5JapanMovie5joke5junji-ITO5MCU_Talk5NCCU5NCCU08_HISTO5ONE_PIECE5popmusic5PuzzleDragon5studyteacher5WeiLi-geo5CKKC3132334CMU_CM444D_Fin_Law_924EarthQuake264EarthQuake434EUREKA4Lawyer4learnyf4Monotheism4NHU_Talk4NSYSU_EE95-14Nurse4pighead4RIPE_gender4SCU_Talk4scu_transfer4Suckcomic4TamShui4Aboriginal3AGEC993Bank_Service3CHU3ck59th3063DPP3Examination3HSNU_11123HSNU_8203Japandrama3kochikame3NCCU09_MAENG3NCCU_SEED3NTNU-HISBK3PttHistory3rent-exp3studyabroad3THU_BA20003THU_Talk3Trans_Study3AboutBoards2Anti-ramp2ChildrensDay2cksh85th3012CSMU-MED932DirectSales2dlsh-7th-3032Drama2Employee2FTHS-1582FuMouDiscuss2Google2Joi2MRT2NCCU_CCSH2NewYork2Nintendo2NTUGIPO_PNSL2NTUmed002NUK_AC982Olympics_ISG2PCSH_talk2Physics2psychedelico2Slayers2tattoo_ring2TNFSH98th2Tour-Manager2Transformers2TYSH50-3032WuLing46-3172AnimMovie1ArakawaCow1ASHS-93-li1Atheism1Bio-Job1Biology1Buddha1Cancer1CCU-GIE981Certificate1CFP1Cheer1CHING1civic_life1ck58th3111cksh79th011Cobras1CODE_GEASS1Conan1CPU_7711CS_TEACHER1CTSH97EXP1DiscoveryNGC1DistantLove1documentary1Doraemon1Drum1ESP1Evangelion1Finance1FineArt1FJU-ACCR941FJU-Stat95A1Folklore1GarbageCan1Gintama1GONZO1H-GAME1HarukiMuraka1HCSH_10th3121HCU1Holland1HSNU_10371HSNU_11461humanity1japanavgirls1JP_Entertain1juniorhigh1kawaii1Kids_Sucker1KingdomHuang1Kitty_Sanrio1kodomo1Kojima1KS93-3161KS94-3021KS94-3181KS95-3141KS96-3141KS98-3021LadyGaga1LightNovel1Lo-Sheng1London1LTK1MacShop1marvel1MetalGear1mknoheya1mobile-game1NCCU01_DIP1NCCU07_Ghis1NCCU_SSSH1NCHU-AE981NCHU-CE-SB1NCHUS1NetRumor1NKFUST1NTOU-MME-99B1NTOUEE981NTUOCGeo1NTUT_IPET4951NYUST98_FING1Ocean1Oceanography1Odoko-juku1P2PSoftWare1Patent1PCCU_Talk1PCman1PHS1PlayStation1PoliceRadio1PoliticLaw1politics1Pride1PT-961PublicAffair1PublicServan1Publish1Queer_drama1QueerHabit1Reptile1Rockman1Salesperson1San-Ying1Scout1SetMeUp1SFFamily1Shima-Kosaku1SHU-Gender951single1SK_SD_PL1SlamDunk1So-Edition1Sorry_Youth1SoulEater1SpongeBob1SSSH-16th-Fk1TaichungBun1Tainan1Taitung1TAS1TCFSH67TH101Tennis1Terry1TFSHS65th3131TFSHS65th3151TFSHS65th3201TFSHS67th3091TFSHS68th3021THEBACKHORN1THULAW1TNNUA-MUSEUM1TORIKO1TryingTimes1TSU1TW-language1UglyClub1USC1vetbasket1Vocaloid1WesternMusic1YMSC_94_3191Yup01-031Yup03-041Yup99-081YZU_CN99A1YZU_MBA971Z-Chen1ZenKwun1Zombie1<< 收起看板(349)
20F推:是說公開與否跟抄襲好像沒關係就是。03/14 20:31
22F推:問題不是有沒有公開發表,而是有沒有抄。03/15 23:30
23F→:即便有個人寫文章藏抽屜,被你發現拿去抄就還是抄阿03/15 23:30
24F→:問題是內容彼此間的關係與相似程度,不是有沒人看到。03/15 23:31
44F推:他既然都這樣質疑你,你覺得這樣可以說服他?03/22 21:47
45F→:我覺得你可以說你願意在文獻的引用上更小心。03/22 21:48
46F→:或者直接問他說你可以怎麼改進,不該解釋不需要引用。03/22 21:48
7F推:我可以理解他在說什麼,他是要你改寫不能大量雷同之類吧03/14 20:29
6F推:這跟著作權無關,單純你想當怎樣的學生或是研究者。02/18 01:35
7F→:如果都有貼自己以前文章可能有問題的想法就不要做了。02/18 01:36
8F→:當你覺得不安代表你自己也過意不去。02/18 01:36
12F推:你的論文應該看做一個長篇故事,而不是短篇選集。02/18 01:38
2F推:如果差很大,代表老師把學生放生了10/10 21:56
3F→:看不起學生,所以挑些沒深度廣度的東西敷衍就好10/10 21:57
33F推:從哪裡來就交代清楚,這是很基本的原則06/05 20:18
34F→:至於碩論份量不足,引用會被打槍是對方該考慮的事情06/05 20:19
35F→:不確實引用是會有抄襲跟學術倫理的問題。06/05 20:19
36F→:看你要選被打槍,或是被說違反學術倫理之類的06/05 20:19
6F推:問題老了也不會有高薪05/30 00:46
2F推:出國還是有差05/27 00:50
6F推:這不是邏輯的錯誤,而是公信力的問題04/11 17:38
7F→:他確實引用,你對他的公信力打折,但符合學術倫理04/11 17:38
8F→:如果沒引用,你不知道他怎麼來的,他還變成自己抄自己04/11 17:39
9F→:未出版的文章並非不能引。04/11 17:40
44F推:為了引用亂湊這是不符合學術規範的04/11 20:00
45F→:絕對不可以找類似的文章來當做註解04/11 20:00
46F→:這是很嚴重的學術倫理違規會黑一輩子04/11 20:00
48F推:為了誠信04/12 21:18
49F推:他們不管你引的東西對你幫助大不大,但會在意你有無欺騙04/12 23:52
50F→:哪天你文章被抓包,期刊一起出事,你覺得他們有沒有差?04/12 23:53
62F推:說真的 第一篇的確是個研究阿 有問題嘛?04/13 00:45
63F→:如果第一篇確實有問題,那就兩篇都被打槍。04/13 00:45
64F→:但為了被收文章而造假抄襲一定不符合學術倫理04/13 00:46
66F→:誠實呈現自己文章的來龍去脈是作者的義務04/13 00:47
67F→:如果編輯或審稿人有疑問會自行回覆,不要自己先改造04/13 00:47
68F→:不知道phenil為何糾結在這個地方?04/13 00:48
69F→:就算要用其他東西驗證,也不應該刪去省略他自己的研究04/13 00:49
70F→:若他的確是由自己之前研究而來,那就應該交代清楚04/13 00:49
71F→:這是引用的最基本原則要忠實呈現。04/13 00:50
72F→:從哪裡看來就交代清楚,有麼難懂?04/13 00:51
73F→:就算你看的是蘋果社論或是什麼商周一樣也得著名清楚04/13 00:53
92F→:我覺得或許很多人以後都要當老師,學術倫理應該要搞清楚04/13 08:03
93F推:沒說引用是為了一定得是要支持自己的研究耶 糾結這個?04/13 08:09
94F→:失敗的實驗或是數據需不需要交代? 引用同理可證04/13 08:10
108F推:這不是合理引用的問題,而是研究方法優劣的問題04/13 12:54
109F推:只要交代清楚就沒有什麼合理不合理問題04/13 12:56
11F推:引用需要忠實呈現,基本上引用問題不大。不引才有問題04/11 14:24
14F推:你覺得自己抄自己問題不大嘛??????04/12 23:56
16F推:問題不是錯誤與否,而是不該變造文獻跟註解04/13 08:02