The award-winning book, entitled “Tyranny of the Weak: North Korea and the World, 1950-1992”, by Charles Armstrong was found to have cited at least 61 instances of non-existent and irrelevant sources in its contents. This is an act of plagiarism which is being repeated again in the academe.
Charles Armstrong is a Professor of Korean Studies in Social Sciences at Columbia University, a specialist in modern Korea, East Asian, and historical studies. His book “Tyranny of the Weak” published in 2013 was contested for authenticity by professor Balazs Szalontai of Korea University. Szalontai claimed that Armstrong committed a total of 90 academic misconducts. This was publicly contested by the professor but the issue was kept silent by the Columbia University.
The statement from the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Columbia University are as follows:
These findings were made in accordance with our policy, which required a confidential preliminary review by an inquiry committee, an investigation by a separate ad hoc faculty committee, oversight and recommendations by the university’s standing Committee on the Conduct of Research, and final decisions, by the executive vice president for research and the provost.
Szalontai’s book was plagiarized by the ‘North Korea’ book
Professor Szalontai assertively expressed his dismay on the act of plagiarism Armstrong committed. He included all his remarks in an email sent to sources. His sentiments are as follows:
A lot of factual details from Armstrong’s 2013 book were similarly close to what I have published way back in 2006.
Szalontai’s reference was his own published book in 2006, titled “Kim Il Sung in the Khrushchev Era: Soviet-DPRK Relations and the Roots of North Korean Despotism, 1953-1964”, from Stanford University Press. He stated:
Armstrong cited Russian and East German archival sources that didn’t exist, incompatible with the contents in the document”. “The dates, type, and content of the cited documents were nearly identical with the analogous Hungarian documents I cited….It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that these nonexistent sources were falsified and with an intention to conceal similarity from my work which is indeed an act of intentional plagiarism.
After the plagiarism incident went public, Armstrong who won the “American Historical Association’s John K.Fairbank Prize in East Asian History in 2014”, said to have returned the prize to the body as a sign of respect for the community.
Self-citation seems to be the practice
As for professor Armstrong’s career, Columbia University still allowed him to teach in the university up until 2019, for now, he is on sabbatical or paid leave from the University. He is expected to retire from service by 2020 as ordered by the University.
This incident caught my attention as I came upon possible instances of similar plagiarisms that go unnoticed and were never brought to anyone’s attention. Access to information come from publications available online and anybody can just pick out a phrase or data without ascribing to sources.
One study done by the University of California found more than two hundred (250) of the most renown researchers have used self-citation for about fifty-percent (50%) of their sources. I think the principal issue in these cases is the lack of integrity of even the most award-studded in academia.
Even publishing houses like Pearson are preparing to digitize their work and soon blockchain will be used to record similar work. When that time comes, no scholar or academic can turn to their own work for citations.
