Prior to the 1970s, student writers were advised to incorporate the ideas of the authors they read in one of two ways: summary or quotation. With increasing instruction in paraphrase as an acceptable method of reproducing the ideas of others came the recognition that sometimes when students produce something that looks like paraphrase, they are actually drawing too heavily on the words of the source rather than rendering the ideas in “original language.” The resulting text has been called patchwriting, cryptomnesia, unconscious plagiarism, and non-prototypical plagiarism, along with various subcategories including clause quilt, copy and paste, word string, pawn sacrifice, and cut and slide plagiarism. The term most commonly used in the USA is patchwriting, although the definition of that term is not fixed and neither is the classification of patchwriting as plagiarism. Some teachers and scholars argue that when patchwriting is accompanied by some form of citation, it should not be classified as plagiarism or as ethical or moral misconduct, but rather as misuse of sources. In some cases that distinction hangs on the concept of intent, which for many is connected with the question of the reading and writing skills of the students in question. Recent research into reading and citation has complicated beliefs about the role of textual difficulty and about student reading practices and source use, suggesting the need for more complex analysis and more nuanced terminology. This chapter describes the distinctions scholars have drawn between plagiarism and the misuse of sources most commonly referred to as patchwriting.
- Source Text
- Academic Dishonesty
- Quotation Mark
- Pedagogical Response
- Community College Student
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
American Psychological Association. (1992). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 1597–1611.
American Psychological Association. (1994). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.). Washington, DC.
Berke, J. (1972). Twenty questions for the writer: A rhetoric with readings. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Brown, A., & Murphy, D. (1989). Cryptomnesia: Delineating inadvertent plagiarism. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15(3), 432–442.
Cheating in College. (1976, June 7). Time, pp. 29–30.
Chittick, R., & Stevick, R. (1961). Rhetoric for exposition. New York: Appleton.
Council of Writing Program Administrators. (2003). Defining and avoiding plagiarism: The WPA statement on best practices. Retrieved from http://www.wpacouncil.org/node/9
Fakouri, M. (1972). Achievement motivation and cheating. Psychological Reports, 31, 629–630.
Gibaldi, J., & Achtert, W. (1977). MLA handbook for writers of research papers, theses, and dissertations. New York: Modern Language Association.
Hacker, D. (1991). The Bedford guide for college writers (3rd ed.). Boston: Bedford.
Haines, V., Diekhoff, G., LaBeff, E., & Clark, R. (1986). College cheating: Immature, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25(4), 342–354.
Hetherington, E., & Feldman, S. (1964). College cheating as a function of subject and situational variables. Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 212–218.
Horning, A. (2010). Reading, writing, and digitizing: A meta-analysis of reading research. The Reading Matrix, 10(2), 243–270.
Howard, R. M. (1993). A plagiarism pentimento. Journal of Teaching Writing, 11(2), 233–246.
Howard, R. M. (1995). Plagiarisms, authorships, and the academic death penalty. College English, 57, 788–806.
Howard, R. M. (1999). Standing in the shadow of giants: Plagiarists, authors, collaborators. Stamford: Ablex.
Howard, R. M., & Jamieson, S. (2013). Research writing. In G. Tate, A. Rupiper-Taggart, B. Hessler, & K. Schick (Eds.), A guide to composition pedagogies (2nd ed., pp. 231–247). New York: Oxford University Press.
Howard, R. M., Serviss, T., & Rodrigue, T. (2010). Writing from sources, writing from sentences. Writing and Pedagogy, 2(2), 177–192.
Hull, G., & Rose, M. (1989). Rethinking remediation: Toward a social-cognitive understanding of problematic reading and writing. Written Communication, 6(2), 139–154.
Jamieson, S. (2008). One size does not fit all: Plagiarism across the curriculum. In R. M. Howard & A. Robillard (Eds.), Pluralizing plagiarism: Identities, contexts, pedagogies (pp. 77–91). New York: Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.
Jamieson, S. (2013). Reading and engaging sources: What students’ use of sources reveals about advanced reading skills. Across the disciplines. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/reading/jamieson.cfm
Jamieson, S. (2015). Revising patchwriting: Data-based insights into ‘transgressive’ student writing. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Modern Language Association, Vancouver, 9 Jan 2015.
Jamieson, S., & Howard, R. M. (2011). Unraveling the citation trail. Project information literacy smart talk, no. 8. Retrieved from http://projectinfolit.org/smart-talks/item/110-sandra-jamieson-rebecca-moore-howard
Jamieson, S., & Howard, R. M. (2013). Sentence-mining: Uncovering the amount of reading and reading comprehension in college writers’ researched writing. In R. McClure & J. Purdy (Eds.), The new digital scholar: Exploring and enriching the research and writing practices of NextGen students (pp. 111–133). Medford: American Society for Information Science and Technology.
Kantz, M. (1990). Helping students use textual sources persuasively. College English, 52(1), 74–91.
Kennedy, M. (1985). The composing process of students writing from sources. Written Communication, 2, 434–456.
Knowlton, J., & Hamerlynck, L. (1967). Perception of deviant behavior: A study of cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 58, 379–385.
Levin, G. (1987). The Macmillan college handbook. New York: Macmillan.
McCrimmon, J. (1957). Writing with a purpose: A first course in college composition. Cambridge, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Nuss, E. (1984). Academic integrity: Comparing faculty and student attitudes. Improving College and University Teaching, 32, 140–143.
Pecorari, D. (2001). Plagiarism and international students: How the English-speaking university responds. In D. Belcher & A. Hirvela (Eds.), Linking literacies: Perspectives on L2 reading-writing connections (pp. 229–245). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Pecorari, D. (2003). Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 317–345.
Pecorari, D. (2008). Academic writing and plagiarism: A linguistic analysis. New York: Continuum.
Perrin, P., & Dykema, K. (1959). Writer’s guide and index to English (3rd ed.). Chicago: Scott Foresman.
Perrin, P., Dykema, K., & Ebbitt, W. (1964). Writer’s guide and index to English (4th ed.). Chicago: Scott Foresman.
Roig, M. (1997). Can undergraduate students determine whether text has been plagiarized? Psychological Record, 47(1), 113–123.
Roig, M. (1999). When college students’ attempts at paraphrasing become instances of potential plagiarism. Psychological Reports, 84(3), 973–982.
Roig, M. (2001). Plagiarism and paraphrasing criteria of college and university professors. Ethics and Behavior, 11(3), 308–323.
Roig, M., & de Jacquant, J. (2001). Guidelines on plagiarism and paraphrasing in writing manuals across various disciplines. In Proceedings: Investigating research integrity, pp. 281–284.
Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sherrill, D., Salisbury, J., Horowitz, B., & Friedman, S. (1971). Classroom cheating: Consistent attitude, perceptions and behavior. American Educational Research Journal, 8, 503–510.
Weber-Wulff, D. (2014). False feathers: A perspective on academic plagiarism. Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39961-9.
Weber-Wulff, D., & Wohensdorf, G. (2006). Strategien der plagiatsbekämpfung. Information: Wissenchaft & Praxis, 57(2), 90–98.
White, W., Zielonka, A., & Gaier, E. (1967). Personality correlates of cheating among college women under stress of independent opportunistic behavior. Journal of Educational Research, 61, 68–70.
Editors and Affiliations
© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore
About this entry
Cite this entry
Jamieson, S. (2016). Is It Plagiarism or Patchwriting? Toward a Nuanced Definition. In: Bretag, T. (eds) Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-098-8_68
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-287-097-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-287-098-8