Effectiveness of Coaching Interventions using Grammarly Software and Plagiarism Detection Software in Reducing Grammatical Errors and Plagiarism of Undergraduate Researches
Open accessAbstract
Grammar checker and plagiarism software are indispensable tools in aiding researchers to identify and correct their mistakes. The study examined the errors detected by grammarly software and plagiarism software and how these were reduced due to coaching interventions. The study used the descriptive and inferential research design involving 47 specimens of student research as undergraduate theses written as publishable paper. These papers were intended for the Advancing Research Journals by academic discipline available online, cross referenced and indexed. The study involved a statistical analysis of data derived from software reports tested through the use of t-test and Pearson correlation. The results showed significant reductions in the occurrence of the grammar errors indicating that the coaching interventions were effective. There is also an inverse, moderate and significant correlation between occurrence of grammatical score and plagiarism. The study concludes that those who commit higher incidents of plagiarism also have lower commission of grammatical errors. When students are poor in writing style and vocabulary use, their score for originality increases. The study recommends for adoption of academic integrity policies to curb grammar and plagiarism occurrences among student researchers in the university.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Japos (2013) conducted a study of undergraduate research students, finding that Grammarly improved their written accuracy.
“Japos (2013) conducted a study of undergraduate research students, finding that Grammarly improved their written accuracy.”
From Stop! Grammar time: University students’ perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly (2019) · cites this paper as Japos, 2013
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Adriaens, G., & Schreors, D. (1992, August). From COGRAM to ALCOGRAM: Toward a controlled English grammar checker. In Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics-Volume 2 (pp. 595-601). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://dl.acm.org/citation. cfm?id=992163
- Aldrete, J. A. 2011 Plagiarism and Other Literary Missteps in Medicine and Particularly in Anesthesia. Revista Colombiana de Anestesiología, 39(2), 217-229. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S0120- 33472011000200006&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en
- Arppe, A. (2000, December). Developing a grammar checker for Swedish. In The 12th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (pp. 13-27). Retrieved August 24, 2013 from Arppe, A. (2000, December). Developing a grammar checker for Swedish. In The 12th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (pp. 13-27).
- Beasley, J. D. (2004, June). The impact of technology on plagiarism prevention and detection: Research process automation, a new approach for prevention. In Proc." Plagiarism: Prevention, Practice and Policies 2004": Joint Information Systems Committee Plagiarism Advisory Service Conference (pp. 28-30). Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?d oi=10.1.1.134.2382&rep=rep1&type=pdf JPAIR Institutional Research
- Bernth, A. 1997 Easy English: A Tool for Improving Document Quality. The Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Applied Language Processing, Washington, 159-165. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://dl.acm.org/citation. cfm?id=974581
- Domeij, R., Knutsson, O., & Eklundh, K. S. 2002 Different Ways of Evaluating a Swedish Grammar Checker. In LREC. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://gandalf.aksis.uib.no/lrec2002/ pdf/180.pdf
- Holan, T., Kuboň, V., & Plátek, M. (1997, March). A prototype of a grammar checker for Czech. In Proceedings of the fifth conference on Applied natural language processing (pp. 147-154). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http:// dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=974579
- Johannessen, J. B., Hagen, K., & Lane, P. (2002, August). The performance of a grammar checker with deviant language input. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Computational linguistics- Volume 2 (pp. 1-8). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1071894
- Liou, H. C. 1991 Development of an English grammar checker: A progress report. CALICO journal, 9(1), 57-70. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://journals.sfu. ca/CALICO/index.php/calico/article/view/424 International Peer Reviewed Journal
- Majhi, A., Sharma, Y. K., & Naik, D. V. 2012 Blending optimization of Hempel distilled bio-oil with commercial diesel. Fuel, 96, 264-269. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236112000671
- Martins, Ronaldo Teixeira, et al. "Linguistic issues in the de elopment of ReGra: A grammar checker for Brazilian Portuguese." Natural Language Engineering4.4 (1998): 287-307. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://journals.cambridge.org/action/disp layAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=48459
- Mason, P. R. 2009 Plagiarism in scientific publications. J Infect Dev Ctries, 3(1), 1-4. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://scholar.google.com.ph/scholar?hl=en&q=pla giarism+in+scientific+publication&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=#
- Shaalan, K. F. 2005 Arabic GramCheck: A grammar checker for Arabic.Software: Practice and Experience, 35(7), 643-665. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http:// onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/spe.653/abstract · DOI
- Smith*, M. W., Dupre, M. E., & Mackey, D. A. 2005 Deterring research paper plagiarism with technology: Establishing a department-level electronic research paper database with e-mail. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16(1), 193-204. Retrieved August 24, 2013 from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1051125042000333 550#. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stop! Grammar time: University students’ perceptions of the automated feedback program Grammarly
ONeill, R., & Russell, A. (2019) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.3795 · Cited by 180 · see citing works
Chang, T.-S., Li, Y., Huang, H.-W., & Whitfield, B. (2021) · 2021 2nd International Conference on Education Development and Studies · doi:10.1145/3459043.3459065 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
- Authors
- Japos, G. V.
- Affiliations
- Liceo de Cagayan University (PH)
- Corresponding author
- Japos, Genaro V.
- ORCID
- Japos, Genaro V.
- Venue
- JPAIR Institutional Research
- Published
- 2013-01-09
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 110-112
- ISSN
- 2244-1816 (ISSN-L)
- 2244-1824
- OpenAlex
- W2082008909
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- JPAIR Institutional Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
- Keywords
- Grammarly, plagiarism detection software, grammatical errors, plagiarism, coaching interventions, undergraduate theses, academic integrity, academic writing, originality, writing style, word usage
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
