Paraphrasing and synthesis are learned skills and they set the expert writer apart from the average or underdeveloped writer.
I am noticing a trend in the papers I receive to edit related to direct quotes. There may be some confusion as to when and how we use material from other sources and I’d like to try to provide some clarification and direction that may be helpful to anyone working with empirical literature.
The first misconception I encounter is students who tell me, “My mentor/chair said I cannot use my own words; I must use the author’s words” or some variation of that sentiment. It might come in the form of, “I cannot use my own voice” or “If I don’t cite it then it’s just my opinion; I have to use the author’s words.”
In essence, this is a true statement. The confusion may lie in what we mean by “my own words” and “the author’s words.” When we are writing the literature review or other parts of the paper where we are citing previous work by scholars in the field, we want to rely on the information we have gleaned through our literature search. We do not want to state as fact something we learned anecdotally or over time through experience. This is what is meant by “stating my own opinion.” Any claim we make must be backed up by at least one credible source.
We all know the law of gravity. We all can say, “What goes up must come down.” This is something we learned in school or through our own experience. However, when we discuss the concept of gravity or the law of gravity in our paper, we want to provide evidence of this accepted fact or an agreement from the academic body to support our claim that anything that is thrown up into the air will eventually fall to the ground due to the forces of gravity. So, we cite some empirical sources where we read that statement.
Does the source we cite have to use the exact words we want to use to express the thought or do multiple sources have to use the very same words to discuss the law of gravity? No. Part of synthesis is to understand the author’s intent and to glean from the author’s writing the essence of the message.
For instance, the statement, “Many daughters are charged with the care of their parents as their parents age” is written in my own words but I can back up that claim more than one empirical source. Vieira da Silva Falcão et al. (2016) stated, “However, the caretaking responsibility usually falls on one person, most commonly the wife, daughter, or daughter-in-law...” (p. 62). Steiner and Fletcher (2017) shared, “The specific purpose of this paper was to examine the roles of sandwich generation women, whom are individuals providing care to both their aging parents/in-laws and children” (p. 133). Finally, Amaro and Miller (2016) noted recent studies conducted by the National Alliance of Caregiving and AARP “indicated that the most common caregiver demographic was that of a middle-aged, married, and employed woman caring for her mother” (p. 101).
In my paper I might write:
Many daughters are charged with the care of their parents as their parents age.
I will cite Vieira da Silva Falcão et al. (2016), Steiner and Fletcher et al. (2017) and Amaro and Miller (2016) to support my claim. It will look like this:
Many daughters are charged with the care of their parents as their parents age (Amaro & Miller, 2016; Steiner & Fletcher et al., 2017; Vieira da Silva Falcão et al., 2016).
In this way I am demonstrating that my knowledge of caregivers is gleaned from at least three empirical sources and I am synthesizing the literature to present an evidenced-based argument for my claim.
The second misconception I hear is something along the lines of “I cannot use my own words. I have to use what the author said; I cited it so I’m ok, right?”
Not necessarily. If how the author stated the concept/idea is best expressed in their own language, then you want to provide a direct quote. Otherwise, you want to restate the author’s idea in your own words to demonstrate your own understanding and progress the compendium of knowledge.
What happens in this case is unintentional plagiarism. We falsely assume we are not allowed to paraphrase and are compelled to use the precise words of the author we are citing, so we put their words into our paper and add a citation behind and call it good. It looks like this:
Caregiving is a task usually completed within the family. The most common caregiver demographic was that of a middle-aged, married, and employed woman caring for her mother (Amaro & Miller, 2016).
OR
Caregiving is a task usually completed within the family. The most common caregiver demographic was that of a middle-aged, married, and employed woman caring for her mother (Amaro & Miller, 2016, p. 101).
Is the information accurate? Yes.
Is the information cited? Yes.
Is the information paraphrased? NO.
In this example I took Amaro and Miller’s (2016) words and passed them off to the reader as though they are my own words. If I feel strongly enough that the way Amaro and Miller wrote the information about caregiving daughters is the best way to present the information, I need to make sure the reader knows I am using Amaro and Miller’s own terminology. I do this with quotation marks and a page number in the citation:
“The most common caregiver demographic was that of a middle-aged, married, and employed woman caring for her mother” (Amaro & Miller, 2016, p. 101).
Both elements MUST be present in a direct quote. Otherwise, it is plagiarism, whether you intended to commit plagiarism or not.
Another way we commit unintentional plagiarism is by what is known as patch-writing. In patch writing we take a quote and change a few, but not many of the words so we can justify the statement as non-quoted material. The APA Publication Manual (2020) defines patch-writing as the identification of a case in which “a few words have been changed but content is largely the same” (p. 255)*. Using Amaro and Miller’s (2016) quote, I might patch-write this way:
Caregiving is a task usually completed within the family. The most common caregiver demographic type of caregiver was that of a middle-aged, married, and employed working woman caring for who takes care of her mother (Amaro & Miller, 2016).
The problem with patch-writing is that it is too closely related to the author’s own words and will result in a red flag in plagiarism checkers. Does that mean I cannot use any of the author’s words in my restatement of the author’s ideas? No. Some words are not easily interchangeable, like “married.” A paraphrase looks beyond the author’s actual words to the meaning or essence of the author’s message. I can still attribute Amaro and Miller (2016) for this statement in a paraphrase, and I can use a few of the words they use when there is no better way to express the term:
According to Amaro and Miller (2016), caregivers are most often women in their middle years who are married and may be working outside the home. These women usually care for their mothers (Amaro & Miller, 2016).
Notice how I said the same thing but I did not structure my sentence the same way Amaro and Miller (2016) did. I most commonly see patch-writing when a student changes one complex word in a quote for a more easily understood term and leaves the rest of the statement unchanged.
Paraphrasing and synthesis are learned skills and they set the expert writer apart from the average or underdeveloped writer.
Here are some basic tips for citing sources:
Paraphrase based on a deep understanding of the literature.
Direct quotes should be used sparingly and only when paraphrasing the statement will cause it to lose its impact on the discussion.
Limit the number of direct quotes in the literature review by following your school’s guidelines. When in doubt, check with your mentor/chair.
If you direct quote, always use quotation marks and include the page number where the quote appears in the original source.
Synthesize whenever you can. Don’t fill an entire discussion on a sub-topic with cites from only one source. Doing so demonstrates you (a) did not research the topic well enough, and (b) do not have a well-rounded and deep understanding of what you are writing about.
For more information on crediting sources, paraphrasing, plagiarism, and patch-writing, please consult Chapter 8 in the APA Publication Manual, 7th edition (2020).
*See also Merriam-Webster. (n.d.-a.) Words we’re watching: Patchwriting’: Paraphrasing in a cut-and-paste world. https://merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/words-were-watching-patchwriting
References
Amaro, L. M., & Miller, K. I. (2016). Discussion of care, contribution, and perceived (in)gratitude in the family caregiver and sibling relationship. Personal Relationships, 23(1), 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12113
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.).
Steiner, A. M., & Fletcher, P. C. (2017). Sandwich generation caregiving: A complex and dynamic role. Journal of Adult Development, 24, 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-016-9252-7
Vieira da Silva Falcão, D., Teodoro, M. L. M., & Bucher-Maluschke, J. S. N. F. (2016). Family cohesion: A study on caregiving daughters of parents with Alzheimer’s disease. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 10(supp1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.v10isupp1.244
Authored by: Keresa Britton, Phd Candidate
Uniquely Keresa Dissertation Consulting & Editing Services
August 24, 2020
Comments