这样的文章算不算抄袭？

yuanqinglu 发表于 2017-7-5 09:07
看段落是什么？文献？假设？变量说明？还是观点？研究目的？

我在这里粘一段好了：


再看看RW的文章：
Most nonlinear price schedules take the form of multi-part tariffs. Since Gabor (1955),
economists have realized that multi-part tariffs imply that the consumer faces a nonlinear (i.e. a
kinked) budget constraint. The demand behaviour of a utility-maximizing consumer thus depends
not on the average price, nor any single marginal price, but on the entire price schedule. The
standard econometric approach to demand analysis in this setting, which traces to Hall (1973), is
to “linearize” the budget constraint. This amounts to using the plane tangent to the consumer’s
nonlinear budget constraint at the optimal consumption bundle as its linear approximation. By
doing so, one can express demand under nonlinear pricing in terms of the ordinary demand
function of classical consumer theory, which assumes a linear budget constraint.
To be specific, let x(p, y) be the ordinary demand function that indicates the consumer’s
desired quantity facing a constant (marginal and average) price p and income y. Suppose, however, that the consumer faces an increasing price schedule s(p) of the form depicted in Figure 1.
Here the consumer pays a low price p1 for each unit up to the quantity xˉ, and a higher price p2
thereafter. Then the optimal consumption level x∗ satisfies


From an econometric perspective, equation (3) is a nonlinear censored regression model in
which the censoring occurs in the interior of the distribution of outcomes rather than the
tails. Such models are generally estimated by maximum likelihood methods, using the discrete
structure in (3) to derive the change-of-variables from an (assumed) marginal distribution of
ε to the distribution of x∗. Burtless and Hausman (1978), with later extensions by Hausman
(1985), Moffitt (1986), and others, develop likelihood functions for models with this structure.
Unfortunately, maximum likelihood estimation quickly becomes computationally intractable
when the consumption outcomes from a mixed discrete/continuous model are aggregated over
time. This problem renders likelihood methods infeasible for our application.9 Consequently, we
pursue a moment-based approach to estimation.


这样的段落由很多，几乎就是原文翻译，就算借鉴模型也不至于全文翻译吧。。。

经济史外行 发表于 2017-7-5 13:49
所说有理。

有“段落”抄袭，如果不是观点和论证依据，就很难说“论文抄袭”。

我回复了一些段落，您可以看看，文风极其相似，几乎就是原文翻译。
相似的这些段落我估计能够占到文章的50%以上。

xinchuzu 发表于 2017-7-5 14:25
某国骗子就是专家，专家就是骗子，这就是讲政治、抓意识形态，全民的共同选择。

刚刚百度了一下，世界经济是中国社会科学院做的，这篇文章一作也是中国社科院的

华中大学子 发表于 2017-7-4 16:10
如果“有大段大段的文字都是从R&W中翻译得出”属实，那么当然属于抄袭。你可以向《世界经济》编辑部举报，不 ...

刚刚百度了一下，世界经济是中国社会科学院做的，这篇文章一作也是中国社科院的

肯定属于抄袭啊。。。建议举报这种学术不端的行为。。学术圈中的渣滓

世界经济 是社科院很重要的期刊 这样做还是很严重的

YYY173 发表于 2017-7-5 14:42
我在这里粘一段好了：

作者有注明出处吗？有注明参考文献吗？

应该是抄袭啊，不抄不会整段整段一样啊

whe58 发表于 2017-7-5 16:19
作者有注明出处吗？有注明参考文献吗？

作者在最开始的地方说参照RW方法，但是不会整段啊