Close

Complete Captcha

• 6 months - 34 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 22 Goods vs 16 No Goods

1. Economist
   6bf9
   

   Deqiu Chen and Yujing Ma are professional habitual plagiarizers!

   https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/what-is-the-difference-between-these-two-papers-such-disgusting-cases

   (1)Younge, Tong, and Fleming (2014, Strategic Management Journal)
   How anticipated employee mobility affects acquisition likelihood: Evidence from a natural experiment
   https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2237

   (2)Chen, Gao, and Ma (2021, Management Science)
   Human Capital-Driven Acquisition: Evidence from the InevitableDisclosure Doctrine
   https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3707

   Discussion about the JFE which they plagiarized a paper published in a Chinese journal.
   https://www.econjobrumors.com/topic/another-forthcoming-in-jfe

   6 months ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 4 Vlad !

2. Economist
   69cc
   

   I don't think this case is a plagiarism. The SMJ paper had been published.

   6 months ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 1 Vlad !

3. Economist
   d70e
   

   I don't think this case is a plagiarism. The SMJ paper had been published.

   Nice logic. Published papers can't be plagiarized?

   6 months ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 3 Vlad !

4. Economist
   b715
   

   This is (1) a strategic omission or (2) an innocent omission. But not plagiarism.

   6 months ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 2 Vlad !

5. Economist
   8426
   

   Inevitable disclosure and non-compete agreements are not the same thing. Read more carefully

   6 months ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 1 Vlad !

6. Economist
   2b33
   

   YM got the job at HKPolyU using this weird MS and that plagiarized JFE.

   6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

7. Economist
   be42
   

   wow, polyu Hk is low

   6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   be42
   

   The authors did it on purpose . Should be reported

   6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 2 Vlad !

9. Economist
   eb14
   

   What exactly do you think the IDD deals with enforcing?

   Inevitable disclosure and non-compete agreements are not the same thing. Read more carefully

   6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

10. Economist
    012b
    

    OP, go get some mental health professional help.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 1 Vlad !

11. Economist
    cf84
    

    What exactly do you think the IDD deals with enforcing?

    Inevitable disclosure and non-compete agreements are not the same thing. Read more carefully
    

    Go read Klasa et al. IDD restricts mobility even WITHOUT non competes. It has nothing to do with enforcing non competes.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

12. Economist
    4519
    

    these two papers deliver the same message. Contribution of the MS paper is almost 0. How did it get published?

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

13. Economist
    777d
    

    disgusting...how Ma yujing got TT job at HK polyu

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

14. Economist
    777d
    

    why is this guy always on cheated papers - Deqiu Chen

    anyone know this guy?

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    a6cb
    

    why is this guy always on cheated papers - Deqiu Chen
    anyone know this guy?

    土鳖博士道德水准底下，为了名利毫无底线，马鱼精也是一样的货色
    This is typical among those “Tubie” who got their PhD in Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Singapore. No ethical standards at all. Habitual cheaters.
    Reject papers from theses people.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

16. Economist
    bcc1
    

    But this paper should not have been published in MS. Same message as the one in the SMJ paper. Its marginal contribution is quite low.

    If another person writes a paper on non-compete agreement enforcement and capital structure, I doubt it would be published at all.

    Also, I think in empirical corporate, people do know the work of Fleming, Marx etc, especially on issues related to labor mobility.

    This is (1) a strategic omission or (2) an innocent omission. But not plagiarism.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

17. Economist
    cf17
    

    But this paper should not have been published in MS. Same message as the one in the SMJ paper. Its marginal contribution is quite low.
    If another person writes a paper on non-compete agreement enforcement and capital structure, I doubt it would be published at all.
    Also, I think in empirical corporate, people do know the work of Fleming, Marx etc, especially on issues related to labor mobility.

    This is (1) a strategic omission or (2) an innocent omission. But not plagiarism.
    

    You are not the editor of MS, so you do not get to decide what is published there. Deal with it.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

18. Economist
    e3a7
    

    The two papers are different
    Period

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

19. Economist
    e585
    

    Ma and Chen are panicking now and they keep posting to defend themselves.

    6 months ago # QUOTE 2 Volod 0 Vlad !

20. Economist
    5920
    

    So disgusting.. of course they didn't cite the original paper

    6 months ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

Reply »