Just read an article on the increase in plagiarism by cutting and pasting from the internet into research papers.  This subject gulls me.  Finding material for papers can be a very hard process - microfiche, old newspapers, searching for those few sentences you actually need in a 1000 page book, conducting interviews, etc.  The "new media" of the internet allows many students to find a website, highlight, cut and paste and call it their own thoughts. 

All material should be cited, period.  I'm a History and History Education major and research is a forte of mine - not too mention an absolute requirement.  I've grown accustomed to diving into material and pulling out what I need.  As a result, citing where I got my sources is not a choice for me; it's a requirement.  Why?

1.  The original author of the material did the footwork for you and should get credit for the work.

2.  Readers of your paper should be able to go back and double check where you formulated your thesis and arguments.

3.  Respect for my professors.

4.  The original source might be flawed in someway.

The first three together should be powerful enough to deter any student from plagiarizing but apparently not.  Anytime I write a paper for a class, I have (and own) the latest version of Chicago Turabian to make sure I credit my sources in the correct way.  I take plagiarizing seriously.  I remember I had to come up with a list of class rules and procedures for one of my education classes.  One of the rules was if you plagiarize, automatic fail on the assignment.  If it happens again, it's a meeting with myself and the principal.  Seems tough, but I view my job as a teacher as preparing students for life and/or college.  In college, plagiarism could land you an F in the course or even in front of a student disciplinary panel.  In your job, plagiarism could get you fired. 

One place I think that researchers need to look into is the amount of plagiarism within the media, especially blogs.  I've noticed both online versions of newspapers and in print versions of articles that will throw out a "fact" like "most Americans believe that..." with no citation of where the author got the information from.  This especially irks me in the online versions because hyperlinking your source is quite easy.  Bloggers seem to be even worse at this lack of citation.  I always try to link to the story where I got my information.  Sometimes, I have someone tell me something in confidence and they don't want their name(s) used.  Likewise, personal experience is also impossible to link. 

My experience with Point #4 I think brings home my argument.  During my Historical Research Methods class, one of our assignments was to pick a book out on some historical event/era/person and then research the author's sources as far back as you can to find out if the author of the book had used the source properly.  I found my book and when I went back 2 sources from the original, I had found that the quote used in my book had been misquoted by the time my author had cited the previous author.  Not good. 

In the end, know that on this site, we do our best to give credit where credit is due and will continue to do so in the future.  In addition, when I do hyperlink my sources, they will open up in a separate window so you can check the source without having to really lose your place in the reading.