Whilst reading a paper I discovered another and I am now building upon the latter. Should I cite the former paper, since that's how I discovered the latter? Or does it suffice to cite only the latter?
Asked
Active
Viewed 382 times
1
-
3See Is there a problem with citing the original source instead of the source where the information was first found? and Who to cite if the original source of a citation does not contain the content that was cited? – Anyon Jul 16 '19 at 13:11
-
1Even with your example, I do not understand why you would want to cite as you describe and what the difference to a direct citation would be. Please try to read your question from the point of view of somebody who doesn’t already know what’s going on or, ideally, ask a friend to do it for you. – Wrzlprmft Jul 20 '19 at 20:01
-
If you cannot find Source 3, then where did you get "we are not able to go on with gasoline/diesel engines" from? If I read your question right, Source 4 does not cover this sentence. – Nobody Jul 30 '19 at 13:45
-
If Source 4 covers that sentence, then you need to specifically state that sentence and cite Source 4 as its source. Then I think you are okay. And I think this question is a duplicate. – Nobody Jul 30 '19 at 14:00
-
1I really think you need to talk to your advisor. I am not in your field. You should follow his advice. If he thinks it's ok, then I think it's fine. – Nobody Jul 30 '19 at 14:59
-
I tried to improve the question with my edit. I don't understand what you mean by I discover a much spectacular case to point the case. Perhaps you mean [1] contradicts author X? Also, is [4] the paper by author X? – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 11:22
-
If the only relevant sentence of author X's work is People walk about 8000 steps [1] at 2,8 m/s [2]., then edit your question to include People walk about 8000 steps [1]... (dropping everything after [1]). By I discover a much spectacular case to point the case, maybe you mean, I discover that author X uses "about" to round 7500 to 8000, if so, then write that (or similar) in your question. – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 11:33
-
1Am I right in understanding that: You read author X's work, discovered [1], and wrote your work based upon [1], rather than author X's work? If so, then you needn't cite author X. – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 11:47
-
I've re-written your question. Does it capture your intent? Have I missed any necessary details? – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 12:06
-
To answer your question: You need only cite the latter source. – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 12:19
-
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your question. – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 13:06
-
Why do you think it is relevant to compare what you write to what author X writes? – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 14:30
-
Why do you think it might be plagiarism? – user2768 Aug 12 '19 at 14:37
1 Answers
3
Unless I misunderstand, the question comes down to "Publication A has cited Publication B, which is a primary source. Can I also cite Publication B, or would that be plagiarism?".
The answer is "Yes, it's fine for multiple people to cite the same primary source".
Flyto
- 9,747
- 2
- 32
- 57
-
As a small remark, make sure to read what you are citing. I once came across a paper that was cited by everyone, but because it was only available in Russian almost no one ever bothered reading it, which resulted in people claiming everything to this paper, which was, in fact, not in there. – Dirk Jul 30 '19 at 12:07
-
Dear @Dirk, have you read my question? or you answered to Flyto? thank you – MscStudent Jul 30 '19 at 12:19