been plagiarized. She values the importance of acknowledging the intellectual work of others, and therefore expects that other professionals adhere to this ...
Running head: MISSING CITATION
1
DRAFT
Publication and Citation Richard E. Watts and Amanda L. Healey Sam Houston State University
DRAFT
Manuscript draft of chapter published in Levitt, D. H., & Hartwig Moorhead, H. J. (Eds.). (2013). Values and ethics in counseling: RealLife ethical decision making (pp. 189-191). New York, MY: Routledge.
MISSING CITIATION
2 The Case of the Missing Citation
Marie Singer-Lee is a well-regarded counselor educator and prolific author. She is most well-known for her work developing applications of feminist counseling theory. Recently, Dr. Singer-Lee was reading a newly published book addressing theories of psychotherapy. In reading the feminist chapter, she noticed that one of the applications she developed was addressed, using conceptualizations and language strongly consistent with her original writings; however, no citation of her work was forthcoming. Due to the fact that there was no acknowledgement of her scholarship, Dr. Singer-Lee was frustrated and concerned because it appeared that her work had been plagiarized. She values the importance of acknowledging the intellectual work of others, and therefore expects that other professionals adhere to this expectation. Unsure how she should respond, she decided to wait a week to contemplate a course of action that would help to ensure a professional response. Dr. Singer-Lee subsequently reviewed two ethical decision-making models from the literature (Corey, Corey, & Callanan, 2010; Remley & Herlihy, 2009). Both models suggested that she identify and examine the potential issues and variables involved. The most obvious issue was that Dr. Singer-Lee believed her work was plagiarized, but she was unsure whether it was intentional or not. A key variable was the intention of the textbook’s authors, and thus she thought it would be prudent to discover how this issue arose. This was an important question because of the potential ramifications of her decision as it pertains to the aforementioned authors. In addition, Dr. Singer-Lee was felt conflicted as to whether she should consider contacting the textbook’s publisher and, possibly, the university where the textbook authors are affiliated. On one hand, her frustration regarding the seemingly inappropriate use of her work suggested a potentially punitive response. On the other hand she thought her response should be a measured
MISSING CITIATION
3
one as she was not certain of the intentionality of the authors and therefore wanted to maintain a sense of professionalism. In reviewing the current American Counseling Association (ACA, 2005) Code of Ethics, as suggested by the decision-making models, Dr. Singer-Lee noted several sections particularly relevant to her concerns. Specifically, the ACA ethical code addresses the responsibility of authors to give recognition of previous work and “not present another person’s work as their own” (G.5.a; G.5.b). Both the ACA code of ethics (H.2.d) and the decision-making models suggested that she consult a knowledgeable colleague to discuss a potential course of action. Her colleague, having read both Dr. Singer-Lee’s original work and the section in question from the textbook, agreed that the similarity was undeniable and that her concerns about plagiarism were warranted. Dr. Singer-Lee and her consultant then considered plausible courses of action. Returning to the code of ethics, they noted that it was an ethical responsibility to take action when one becomes aware that a counselor is behaving in an unethical manner. Both agreed that the concerns regarding plagiarism met the criteria. According to the ethical code (H.2.b), Dr. Singer-Lee’s first course of action was to contact the lead author of the textbook and seek to resolve the issue. This fit with her personal goal of discovering whether the plagiarism was intentional. Therefore, she and her consultant decided this was the best course of action. In order to have documentation of the contact, Dr. Singer-Lee decided to email the lead author of the textbook. In the email she delineated her concerns about the possibility of plagiarism and specifically identified the portions of the book containing concepts and language that were remarkably similar to those in her published journal articles. In addition, she attached
MISSING CITIATION
4
copies of the relevant articles. Finally, she requested the author contact her to discuss a potential resolution of the issue. The lead author responded within a week. He indicated that, although he was not the lead author for the feminist chapter, he did not believe the specific information in question was similar enough to indicate plagiarism. That being said, however, he stated he was willing to discuss the matter via telephone and requested that the chapter author be a part of the conversation. Although somewhat frustrated by the response, Dr. Singer-Lee was amenable to further discussion and replied suggesting a specific day and time for the telephone call. Once a date for discussion was scheduled, Dr. Singer-Lee began preparing a document for review during the meeting. She outlined each area of concern within the chapter and noted corresponding areas within her own work; indicating whether or not the section contained issues that drew from her conceptualizations or contained linguistic content very similar to her published work. Once she created this outline, Dr. Singer-Lee again consulted with the same colleague she had confided in previously, showed her the document she planned to send and discussed possible outcomes regarding the future conversation. The consultant suggested that Dr. Singer-Lee send an e-mail after the discussion with the authors was complete outlining any resolutions or further areas for remediation. With the agreement of her consultant, she sent the document outlining the instances of alleged plagiarism. On the day of the conference call, the author of the text and the chapter author were both present as agreed. Upon discussion, both authors agreed that Dr. Singer-Lee had cause for concern and that perhaps some of the ideas related to her previously published journal articles did indeed influence the chapter author’s work. However, the chapter author indicated this was done in error and was in no way intentional; research assistants had helped her compile
MISSING CITIATION
5
information for the chapter and the author admitted that perhaps she had not done due diligence in reviewing their work in conjunction with her own conceptual developments as she was writing. All parties agreed that the publisher would be contacted immediately and any subsequent printings and future editions would include citations of Dr. Singer-Lee’s work. A follow-up e-mail was sent after the call was complete outlining the plan for action agreed upon by the textbook author and chapter author. Later, the chapter author sent a draft of the changes for Dr. Singer-Lee’s approval. This was then sent to the publisher. Following this process, Dr. Singer-Lee retained documentation of the correspondence, dates she met with her consultant, plan for resolution, and any subsequent e-mails sent between herself and the textbook author. These records were kept until the altered printing of the text was published. Several ethical standards were addressed in the above case study. First, authors must give recognition of previous work on a topic (G.5.a). Second, authors must not present another person’s work as their own (G.5.b). Third, it is useful to consult one or more colleagues wellversed in counseling ethics and the ACA Code of Ethics prior to taking any action (H.2.d). Next, counselors have a responsibility to take action if they believe a counseling professional may be behaving in an unethical manner (H.2.a). Finally, counselors should initially seek to resolve the ethical dilemma in an informal manner, if possible (H.2.b). Dr. Singer-Lee followed several useful steps in her decision making process. First, she was insightful and reflective enough to stop and think about her position before taking action to resolve the issue of plagiarism that she identified. Sometimes professionals may feel slighted or hurt by a colleague and, rather than reflecting on their values, possible actions, and the consequences of those actions, they may choose to react impulsively to their immediate feelings and thoughts. Dr. Singer-Lee valued professionalism and thus attempted to assume the best
MISSING CITIATION
6
intentions from her professional colleagues. This perspective helped her to attempt to address the issue of plagiarism from a tentative position of curiosity rather than anger. Additionally, Dr. Singer-Lee sought consultation with a colleague and referred to established professional ethical practices (models and codes) to help inform her process. Her actions were congruent with her beliefs regarding professional respect, courtesy, and open communication. Sometimes, rather than engage in a potential conflict, professionals avoid discussions that may be challenging to “keep the peace”. However, when one chooses to avoid ethical issues, a multitude of long-term consequences may result that could lead to further feelings of discontent and anger; potentially harming future professional relations unnecessarily. Not only did Dr. Singer-Lee reflect, consult, and plan her actions but she advocated for herself and what she thought was right. Resulting from this process, the textbook authors learned to be more diligent in verifying their sources and documenting same. Dr. Singer-Lee learned the value of following a thoughtful decision-making process, as well as the value of consultation, when encountering a potential ethical concern. She and the textbook authors all learned a valuable lesson about addressing ethical dilemmas in a forthright, yet professional manner. In sum, all parties were satisfied with the outcome as the participants were able to informally resolve the issue without involving the publisher or the authors’ institutions. This was possible due to the chapter and textbook authors’ willingness to critically review their own work, Dr. Singer-Lee’s diligence and collegiality in addressing the issue, as well as her adherence to professional ethical decision-making guidelines.
MISSING CITIATION
7 References
American Counseling Association (2005). ACA Code of Ethics. Alexandria, VA: Author. http://www.counseling.org/Resources/CodeOfEthics/TP/Home/CT2.aspx Corey, G., Corey, M. S., & Callanan, P. (2010). Issues and ethics in the helping professions (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Remley, T. P., Jr., & Herlihy, B. (2009). Ethical, legal, and professional issues in counseling (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
