The essence of high-quality scientific research, which is seen in obtaining true scientific novelty, includes aspects of scientific communication. The rapid development of information and communication digital technologies provides virtually unlimited potential for information support in the communication process while increasing the risks of plagiarism, infringement of intellectual property rights, and dissemination of unoriginal scientific text.

The international experience of implementing the principles of academic integrity and monitoring their implementation is based on the fight against various manifestations of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. At the institutional level, this fight was launched in 1990 in the United States by creating the Centre for Academic Integrity to combat plagiarism, fraud and academic dishonesty. In 2010, the International Centre for Academic Integrity (ICAI) officially became an international organisation and operates in over twenty countries.¹

Some contemporary scholars are exploring the integration of innovative digital tools into the traditional scientific environment, which brings both positive aspects of information accessibility and communication interaction and the related risks of plagiarism and intellectual property infringement.^2,3,4 Other scholars focus on qualitatively new approaches to creating unique texts.^5,6

Petrushka⁷ considers the potential of social media in the context of academic communities to prevent the use of unfair practices. At the same time, Koshetar et al.⁸ note that codifying ethical and communicative regulations of the modern scientific environment forms a model of intercultural dialogue and promotes the ethics of solidarity.

As emphasised by Fatima et al.,⁴ the legal regulation of relations in the digitalised space of representation of research results presents specific difficulties. Scientists insist on the need for a systematic upgrade of sectoral regulations regulating information and communication relations in the scientific sphere based on the principles of the rule of law and academic integrity. At the same time, several problematic aspects of combating plagiarism and academic dishonesty require in-depth research.

Among the key research questions raised in the article are: exploring technological tools to support academic originality and key institutional mechanisms that promote integrity; familiarization with international frameworks of ethical standards in higher education; identifying key challenges to academic integrity; assessing the functional role of digital academic publications in ensuring text uniqueness; and identifying strategies for improving scientific communication and mechanisms for combating plagiarism.

The issue of guaranteeing academic integrity as a basis for the quality of scientific research is directly or indirectly developed in numerous modern scientific studies. Kim and Uysal⁹ focus on the ethical dilemmas of plagiarism, proposing to integrate the foundations of cultural tolerance and inclusiveness into the educational space, as the educational environment is a key source of development of the scientific community, and academic integrity skills become inherent in the researcher who has learned them during education.

Malik et al.¹⁰ study the main prerequisites for the perpetuation of plagiarism in education and science, highlighting among them laziness and uncertainty, a lack of a motivated and proactive approach to educational and research activities, incompetence of teachers and supervisors, the positioning of plagiarism as a common phenomenon, and the lack of serious penalties for its use.

Prashar et al.¹¹ identified individual factors that significantly impact the level of academic integrity in the educational and research environment, including work experience, gender, age, and internal religiosity. The researchers examined respondents’ ethical considerations regarding unintentional plagiarism and analysed the level of efforts made by educational and research institutions to raise awareness of academic integrity.

Contemporary researchers Sefcik et al.¹² position centrally managed programmes that impose sanctions for non-compliance as the most effective method of achieving academic integrity requirements in higher education. Furthermore, Fatima et al.⁴ investigate the impact of self-competence, self-efficacy and pressure on plagiarism rates in the academic environment, identifying the influence of individual traits.

Researchers Xu et al.¹³ raise the dilemmatic issue of the limits of the impact of the ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) artificial intelligence tool on academic integrity in the scientific environment. The authors also raise the acute issue of artificial intelligence’s negative impact on the quality of research and the level of higher education in the context of academic integrity and emphasise the issue’s silence in the media space due to the current global strategy of active promotion of ChatGPT.

Yaroshenko¹⁴ identifies certain types of academic dishonesty and plagiarism and the main preconditions for their occurrence. The researchers’ work can serve as a basis for developing an effective strategy for guaranteeing academic integrity.

In continuation, Dawson¹⁵ investigated the potential of modern digital tools to prevent infringement of intellectual property rights, prevent electronic fraud and actively support academic integrity in the scientific field. The scientist sees the development of information and communication tools as a powerful potential for improving scientific communication processes and creating unique texts.

Publications of recent years highlight the functionality of the phenomenon of scientific communication based on the principles of academic integrity,¹⁶ study the culture of professional communication in scientific circles against the background of global digitalisation,¹⁷ and pay special attention to the development of an information model of scientific communication that eliminates the risks of plagiarism.¹⁸ At the same time, the issue of improving the system of guarantees of academic integrity in the context of ensuring the uniqueness of scientific research with the help of innovative technologies remains mainly outside the research interests.

Protocol and registration. The study is a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR). This scoping review complies with the recommendations of the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) protocol.

Eligibility criteria. Studies were included that analyzed the current role of academic integrity in the development of the scientific environment. The criteria for inclusion and exclusion of publications were spatial (European region, USA) and temporal (2018–2025) indicators and the level of reliability of information (indexing in scientometric databases). The date of the last search was the first half of 2025. There were no restrictions on language or date; articles written in languages other than English were considered acceptable if they contained sufficient English-language information in the introduction, tables, and images.

Sources of information. To identify potentially relevant documents, researchers conducted a systematic search of databases (Web of Science, Scopus) from 2018 to January 2025. The final search results were exported to EndNote, and duplicates were removed.

Search. Comprehensive search queries included descriptors based on the terms “academic integrity, scientific research, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, digitalisation, text uniqueness, scientific communications, electronic publications”.

The electronic search strategy in Google Scholar involved combining keywords in quotation marks for an exact phrase search, using the operators AND, OR, NOT (or space), author, define, as well as limiting the results by year or type of publication through settings or the date range search function.

Selection of evidence sources. Two independent reviewers assessed records for inclusion based on titles and abstracts. Abstracts that did not meet the inclusion criteria or that met the exclusion criteria were rejected. The remaining records, as well as those whose abstracts did not contain sufficient information to make a decision about their exclusion, were selected for full-text analysis, which was conducted by the same reviewers independently of each other. A third reviewer resolved any discrepancies.

Diagram construction process and data elements. The selected studies were analyzed and data were extracted using a standardized system developed for this study. The following information was obtained: first author, year of publication, study design, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Summary of results. The information obtained from the included studies has been summarized.

The quality assessment of the included studies involved checking their methodological rigor and reliability in order to understand how reliable the conclusions of these studies are for the future review. The general screening flowchart can be presented as follows (Figure 1):

The PRISMA diagram was used – this is a data selection scheme in the process of systematic literature review, which visually demonstrates the process of searching, filtering, and including publications in the study, helping to ensure transparency and reproducibility. It consists of blocks describing the various stages of selection and arrows showing the flow of research from the initial search to the final set of sources (Figure 2).

The quality assessment of the included studies involved checking their methodological rigor and reliability to understand how reliable the conclusions of these studies are for the future review. The Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAT) was used, a validated tool for assessing the quality of studies included in a systematic review, which provides criteria and screening questions for assessing methodology and determining an overall quality score. The Mixed Methods Assessment Tool (MMAT) is designed to assess quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods studies.

The categorical matrix was used as a methodological tool to reflect the logical and substantive connection between the object and subject of the study, harmonizing theoretical and practical aspects. It envisaged five phases of implementation: studying and compiling cases for the program with the aim of developing engagement, combining practice with theory; measurement (conducting surveys that highlight any problem areas regarding behavior that creates psychological safety); building (key interventions and actions that create further momentum and improvement); support (practice and formation of behavioral habits); reflection (self-reflection and retrospection).

Data synthesis. A qualitative data synthesis was conducted, which involved:

Specific features of the development of the global educational environment.

The innovative information environment offers alternative models of scientific communication – the concept of open access and the pay-per-article model. The phenomenon of a scientific electronic publication is seen primarily as a primary source for publishing research results, theories and ideas, their critical discussion and the development of scientific debate.

World-renowned scientific publishers have issued an official statement banning the authorship of ChatGPT or Large Language Models while demanding transparency and specificity in the list of tools and how they were used in creating a scientific text. AI facilitates the analysis of specific aspects from an opposite perspective and improves the processing of large information arrays.¹³

The phenomenon of academic integrity in the modern context.

The definition of academic integrity in European science and education has been significantly expanded and clarified in the course of the activities of the International Centre for Academic Integrity (ICAI), which in 1999 defined the “fundamental values of academic integrity” – justice, honesty, respect, trust and responsibility, to which another one was added fifteen years later – courage.¹

The Bucharest Declaration on Ethical Values and Principles of Higher Education in the European Region¹⁹ is important in the context of institutional support for academic integrity. The Declaration defines the basic principles of academic integrity in the scientific and educational environment. It emphasizes that the pursuit of honesty begins with individual efforts to systematically avoid fraud, deception, lying, theft and other dishonest behaviour that negatively affect the quality status of academic and scientific degrees. The Declaration defines justice, trust, responsibility and respect as the main vectors of ensuring academic integrity.

Leading empirical research in recent years in the field of academic integrity.

The functioning of the European Network for Academic Integrity (ENAI) is also noted among the project and institutional foundations of the academic integrity system. The organization has developed the “Academic Integrity as a Key Competence for Sustainable Development and the UN SDGs” project, which aims to develop a deeper understanding of the UN Sustainable Development Goals from an academic perspective.²⁰

ICAI leads the study of cases of academic dishonesty in the educational environment. In 2020, 840 respondents took part in the survey, which allowed us to identify key forms of violations of the principles of academic integrity (Figure 3).²¹

The study includes data from five higher education institutions, including two large public universities, a small public university, a private university, and a small private liberal arts college. Analyzing Figure 3, it should be noted that the sample indicates a persistent trend toward students’ propensity for academic misconduct.

In continuation, it is advisable to present the results of a survey of respondents in the research and education sector in Ukraine in 2021. These results represent the intensification of negative attitudes towards plagiarism in the professional consciousness. At the same time, scientists underestimate the risks of self-plagiarism (Figure 4).²² The tool used was an anonymous survey conducted in modern higher education institutions.

The information presented in Fig. 4 shows the results of assessing the impact of various violations of academic integrity by teaching staff on the quality of educational activities and indicates that society is not ready to eradicate the habits of dishonest academic activity.

Analyzing Figure 3 and Figure 4, it should be noted that the samples represent a stable trend of academic misconduct in the research and education environment. The assessment results of the impact of various violations of academic integrity on the quality of scientific activity indicate that society is not ready to eradicate habits.

Measures to ensure academic integrity.

Ensuring the quality of research requires the active involvement of all participants in scientific communication. Among the main measures to ensure academic integrity are the following:^3,23

Specific examples of academic integrity policy implementation that can be used to integrate an effective strategy to combat academic integrity violations in educational institutions include:

In particular, in 2023, Uzhhorod National University published a collection of essays on the topic “My Academic Integrity.” This can serve as a practical example of how an educational institution encourages students to adhere to academic integrity.

AI is a potential tool for verifying academic integrity. Key principles for using AI to support academic integrity include technical reliability and security, transparency of use, confidentiality and data management, and accountability. These principles contribute to the creation of a safe, inclusive, and transparent educational environment in which AI is used as a tool to improve the quality of learning and ensure the ethicality of processes.

This study proposes to detail programs for combating plagiarism and supporting academic integrity by creating Codes of Academic Integrity at the level of educational institutions and scientific institutions, which will take into account the specifics of the object’s activities as much as possible. Such local Codes define ethical principles and rules of conduct in the educational or scientific process to ensure honesty, respect, and responsibility, based on legislation and principles established in Model Regulations or codes.

The key aspects of developing effective codes of academic integrity should be:

Many scientific publications of our time are devoted to the issues of identifying dishonest practices in the field of research and finding ways to counteract plagiarism. Canfield et al.²⁴ argue that the scientific environment today is in a state of convergence of the potential of natural and artificial intelligence, which are integrated into a single synthesised scientific entity.

Guzman and Lewis²⁵ emphasize the risks of using artificial intelligence in creating a scientific text in the context of levelling the personal achievements of scientists. The authors’ main arguments are further developed in several publications that have explored the issue of identifying malpractices and countering the spread of plagiarism.^26,27 Scholars argue that effective science communication requires a critical approach focusing on inclusivity, equity, and intersectionality.

Domingues² proposes a holistic approach to the anti-plagiarism system: perception of reality, reflection based on perception, and reflective performance. At the same time, Saeidnia and Lund²³ identify excessive employment, overload, easy access to electronic information resources, low competence in proper citation, and lack of risk of significant punishment as the alleged causes of plagiarism in scientific research. Overall, the conclusions of these researchers reinforce the findings of the current study.

Among the various administrative strategies to ensure academic integrity, Sefcik et al.¹² identify centrally managed programs that impose sanctions for non-compliance as the most effective method of achieving results in the fight against plagiarism.

Xu et al.¹³ summarize, based on a meta-analysis, that effective anti-plagiarism and IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) protection positively impact innovation and economic growth. At the same time, the level of impact on innovation development in developing countries is much weaker than in developed countries. This applies to specific areas of the issue that require more detailed research.

Among the publications of recent years, scientific studies of the development of the digital environment and its impact on academic integrity deserve special attention. In particular, Habibzadeh²⁸ examines the phenomenon’s evolution and typology, identifies the main problems scientists face in the digital world, and suggests ways to solve them. The proposed solutions to the problems are continued in the following publications.

Anam²⁹ reviews current legislative initiatives and the effectiveness of their practical implementation. The author focuses on solutions in the field of intellectual property protection. Akinduyite³⁰ analyses the use of artificial intelligence in the context of copyright protection in a recent publication. The researcher notes that the legal regulation of this issue should ensure the preservation of the status quo. At the same time, the research by Su et al.³¹ forms the theoretical basis for effective management in the field of research and protection of intellectual property, analysing the related risks caused by digitalization.

Sivasubramaniam³² updates the dynamics of the education systems in India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka to examine in more detail their path toward improving academic integrity in higher education. The scholar argues that there is an excessive reliance on text comparison software to detect plagiarism. At the same time, these initiatives are rarely backed up by measures to teach students academic integrity, scientific writing, citation styles, or ways to avoid plagiarism. This shows that these countries are just starting to build a culture of integrity in all aspects of education. Further scientific research is needed in this area.

Instead, Orim³³ analyzes the factors responsible for this variation in academic integrity, including the education system, pedagogy, the sociocultural environment, the economic environment, infrastructure, technology, institutional policy, and management systems. The researcher emphasizes the large number of reported and unreported cases of academic misconduct, which makes achieving academic integrity a serious problem in African countries.

A number of contemporary scholars, including Lund and Naheem,³⁴ have examined AI-based authorship policies in leading academic journals and concluded that AI-based authorship policies may vary depending on the publisher and discipline of the publication.

At the same time, Crawford et al.³⁵ propose five editorial principles that editors should follow when making decisions, viewing AI as a mechanism that can complement our current practices but is unlikely to replace them entirely. The authors^36,37 propose a substantive approach to technological neutrality aimed at achieving normative balance in the face of technological change.

Fundamental works in the field of research are presented by Macfarlane et al.³⁸ and Bretag,³⁹ who propose a productive approach that focuses on promoting the positive values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage as intrinsically motivated drivers of ethical academic practice. The authors go beyond plagiarism, dishonesty, fraud, and other academic misconduct, as well as how best to prevent such behavior. Instead, they rely on multidimensional analysis using surveys/questionnaires, document analysis, and, occasionally, interviews.

Levin⁴⁰ updates the requirements for accuracy and relevance that can be met in research. The researcher presents four factors that will contribute to high accuracy in writing scientific texts to convey research results: research partnerships; bias control; standardized methods; and alternative explanations. Ramdani⁴¹ creates a scale that takes psychometric properties into account, with a demonstrated systematic process and reliable calculations.

Despite the amount of work done by modern researchers in the field of the outlined issues, several issues remain under-researched. The risks of digitalising the information and communication environment to guarantee academic integrity in the scientific field require special attention today.

The priorities for ensuring academic integrity are: introducing information transparency, forming a culture of trust and respect, applying anti-plagiarism technologies, and combating manifestations of dishonesty. All participants in the educational process are responsible for ensuring academic integrity: students (undergraduates, pupils), academic and teaching staff (lecturers, teachers, researchers), as well as the management of educational institutions and state bodies that develop relevant laws and regulations.

The dynamics of requirements for the reliability and quality of research results raise the issue of ensuring academic integrity and upgrading the concept of guaranteeing the uniqueness of a scientific text. Adherence to the principles of originality and integrity is complicated by unlimited access to the integrated scientific and information environment and the increased risk of plagiarism in science.

The main areas of academic integrity include trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, honesty, and courage. A reliable system of detecting academic dishonesty can ensure a high level of research quality for academic and research institutions. Particular attention should be paid to the risks of self-plagiarism in the scientific environment.

The system of protection of academic integrity should meet modern requirements, providing for actions aimed at preventive protection and timely elimination, as well as subsequent lawful restoration of violated rights to the results of scientific activity through jurisdictional and non-jurisdictional forms of protection. The prospect for further research is to develop proposals for improving the current legal framework regarding integration with intellectual property legislation.