{"id":7155,"date":"2015-07-02T19:38:00","date_gmt":"2015-07-02T17:38:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/?p=38507&lang=en"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:22:23","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:22:23","slug":"plagiaat-in-proefschrift-niet-voldoende-hersteld","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2015\/07\/02\/plagiaat-in-proefschrift-niet-voldoende-hersteld\/","title":{"rendered":"Dissertation unsatisfactorily amended following plagiarism discovery"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

Het desbetreffende proefschrift<\/span><\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>

The RSM doctoral candidate who submitted a dissertation with plagiarised sections has not satisfactorily rectified this issue after being given a second chance. Although the dissertation no longer contains actual plagiarism, the doctoral candidate did not manage to \u201crewrite the dissertation in accordance with the standards of good scholarship\u201d. For this reason, she has been asked to voluntarily relinquish the doctoral title conferred on her. Erasmus University Rotterdam explicitly distances itself from the dissertation in question.<\/p>\n

Last year, Erasmus University\u2019s Scientific Integrity Committee recommended revoking the candidate\u2019s academic title of Doctor. It did so in response to plagiarism issues identified in her dissertation: at least 17 pages were copied word for word from books, and another two pages from online sources. However, the University decided not to revoke the recently conferred title at that point. In the opinion of the Executive Board, there were alleviating circumstances since the candidate had received seriously inadequate support and guidance from her thesis supervisor. For this reason, the candidate was formally reprimanded and given the opportunity to rewrite her dissertation. Other dissertations that had been overseen by the thesis supervisor in question were also checked for plagiarism.<\/b><\/p>\n

Rewritten version does not satisfy the requirements<\/b>
\nThe revised version of the dissertation was examined by a new committee made up of two independent experts who are not affiliated with the University. This committee concluded that the rewritten version does not satisfy the conditions set by the Executive Board. While the plagiarised sections themselves had been removed from the dissertation, they had \u201conly been very lightly revised in substantive terms\u201d. In addition, 12 pages of text had simply been removed in their entirety. In addition, the committee points out that the dissertation contains a very large number of references to secondary sources, without the candidate offering any evidence that she has personally checked the primary sources.<\/p>\n