What Went Wrong? A Five-School Review of Master’s Theses Reference List

2018

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1080/02763877.2018.1503989
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

A good citation and referencing practice starts when a student correctly cites and follows the specified citation format. Academic integrity is closely associated with plagiarism but there is another particular error that academics neglect to verify: the proper formatting of a reference list based on a particular citation style. The purpose of the study is to trace, review and analyze the reference list of selected master’s theses submitted to one of the leading universities in Kazakhstan. Results showed a high number of referencing errors. Having a standard format will prevent future mistakes.