
These days the majority of journals pass each submission through similarity software like Turnitin or iThenticate, and a number of them turn down manuscripts on the strength of the report alone. Still, authors frequently misread it. A percentage is no final judgement, and a small figure does not demonstrate originality. Studying the report carefully before submission is among the quickest ways to prevent delays.
The Way Similarity Software Operates
Your text is checked against a huge collection of published articles, web pages and earlier submissions, and passages that match are flagged along with where they came from. You get a total similarity percentage plus a list of matches. What it finds is overlapping text, not plagiarism itself; deciding whether the overlap is a problem is up to an editor. Treat the report as a prompt for questions rather than an answer.
Interpreting the Percentage
| Pattern | Usually means | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Numerous small matches scattered through the paper | Everyday phrases and standard terminology | Usually fine |
| A single large block that matches one source | Copied or reused text | Rewrite and cite |
| Heavy overlap with your own thesis or earlier paper | Self-reuse | Rewrite, cite, disclose |
| Matches in references and methods boilerplate | Expected | Editors often leave these out |
What Editors Commonly Leave Out
- The reference list
- Quoted material in quotation marks with citation
- Very small matches (for example under 8–10 words)
- Standard method descriptions — though you should still paraphrase where you can
The Correct Way to Fix Overlaps
- Trace the origin of every large match. Does it come from another author, or from your own earlier writing?
- Put it in your own words. Alter the structure and phrasing instead of swapping a handful of synonyms.
- Credit every source you drew on. Restating an idea without a citation is still plagiarism.
- Declare prior versions. When the paper grows out of your thesis or a conference paper, mention that in the cover letter.
Why a Low Score Does Not Prove Originality
Paraphrasing tools and translated passages can conceal borrowed ideas from similarity software. Journals also look out for altered text, invented data and duplicated images. Being original means the ideas, data and wording are yours, or that any use of others’ work is clearly credited. A clean score therefore says little about the integrity of the research itself.
AI Writing and Similarity Checks
Text produced by AI may not match any existing source and can therefore get through similarity checks, yet a lot of journals now ask you to declare any AI use and keep you accountable for accuracy and originality. Obey the journal’s AI policy, and never allow a tool to make up references.
Rewriting a Matched Passage: Before and After
| Version | Text |
|---|---|
| Original source | “Fly ash improves the long-term compressive strength of concrete due to its pozzolanic activity.” |
| Poor rewrite (synonym swap) | “Fly ash enhances the long-term compressive strength of concrete owing to its pozzolanic action.” |
| Good rewrite (own words + citation) | “Because fly ash reacts slowly with calcium hydroxide, its contribution to concrete strength appears mainly at later ages [12].” |
The better version reshapes the idea, explains the reasoning and cites its source. Simply swapping synonyms still matches the original and is still regarded as copying.
The 10 Most-Searched Questions on This Topic
Here are the ten questions researchers search for most on this subject, each with a direct answer.
Turnitin checked journal
A journal that checks submissions using Turnitin or iThenticate similarity software.
acceptable similarity percentage for journal
No single figure applies everywhere; editors consider where the matches fall as well as the overall total.
iThenticate vs Turnitin
Both rely on Turnitin’s technology, with iThenticate being the edition built for publishers and researchers.
how to reduce similarity index
Put matched passages into your own words and cite your sources correctly.
self plagiarism in research paper
Using your own published or submitted text again without citing or disclosing it.
exclude references Turnitin
The reference list and quoted material are frequently left out of the score by editors.
paraphrasing tool plagiarism
Hiding copied text with software counts as misconduct and can often be detected.
thesis to journal similarity
Reword the text and state that the paper is based on your thesis.
rapid publishing peer reviewed journal
Well-run journals check similarity at the start, so a clean report helps your paper move along faster.
AI writing detection journal
A lot of journals want AI use disclosed, and authors stay responsible for the content.
How JMVRA Fits In
JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals. UGC public notice (PDF)
Every submission to JMVRA is screened for similarity ahead of peer review, which means papers arriving with a clean, properly cited report go on to reviewers without holdup.
- ISSN
- 2984-8911 (online) · publishing since June 2023
- Issues
- Monthly issues across many disciplines
- Review
- Two-way anonymous review by specialists
- Access
- Open access, licensed CC BY 4.0
- Fee
- ₹971 INR for Indian and $41 USD for foreign authors, due only after acceptance
- DOI
- Crossref — available as an optional extra
- Indexing
- Google Scholar has it; it is not in Scopus, Web of Science or DOAJ
- Impact factor
- 11.25, derived from Google Scholar data
Screening begins the moment a paper arrives and each decision is sent as soon as it is reached, yet JMVRA never promises a set number of days: actual review time depends on the reviewers and on how much revision the paper needs.
At-a-Glance Checklist
- Report readMatch by match
- Quotes markedAnd cited
- Self-reuse citedEarlier papers
- AI use disclosedIf used
- JMVRA limitBelow 15%
Repeating Your Own Earlier Work
Thesis text
Disclose it; reuse can be fine when cited.
Preprints
Normally fine, but declare them.
Earlier papers
Reword and cite; do not recycle text.
Methods text
A degree of reuse is normal; cite where it came from.
Checks to Make Prior to Submission
- Use your institution’s checker where one exists — ask the library or research office
- Examine the sources, not only the figure — which passages are matching?
- Reword and cite — put matched passages in your own language
- Stay below 15% — the JMVRA threshold
Practical Tips for Handling a Similarity Report Calmly
A similarity report is a map of matching text, not a verdict. These tips help you read it sensibly, correct genuine problems and explain legitimate overlap to an editor.
- Read the matches, not the headline figure. Open the report and look at which passages match and from which sources. A few long matches from one source matter far more than many tiny scattered ones.
- Paraphrase by understanding. Close the source, explain the idea in your own words from memory, then check accuracy and cite. Swapping synonyms in the original sentence is still too close and often remains flagged.
- Quote sparingly and mark it. Use direct quotation only when exact wording matters, enclose it in quotation marks and give the citation. Standard methods text and reference lists often match harmlessly.
- Declare reuse of your own work. If a section builds on your thesis or earlier paper, say so in the manuscript and cover letter. Open disclosure is much better received than discovery by the editor.
- Check early, with time to revise. Run the check on a near-final draft, leaving days to fix problems rather than hours. Rushed rewriting can introduce errors and inconsistent citation.
Use the report as a diagnostic tool: inspect each match, rewrite from understanding, cite properly and disclose any overlap with your own earlier work.
Questions Researchers Often Ask
How Transparent Peer Review Works, Stage by Stage
- SubmissionInitial checks cover plagiarism, formatting and scope.
- Reviewer assignmentExperts in the subject are allocated via the Scholar9 portal.
- Double-blind reviewReviewers judge originality, method, significance and clarity.
- DecisionThe outcome (accept, revise or reject) is communicated by email and WhatsApp.
- RevisionEach reviewer comment gets a point-by-point reply from the authors.
- TransparencyThe review record is on Scholar9, and a report is available on request.
The three transparency models are open reports, optional reviewer identity and open participation; see how JMVRA applies them.
Ready to Publish? Submit to JMVRA
JMVRA is aligned with UGC's Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
Helpful pages on jmvra.org
Key Terms
Subjects and search phrases this article addresses.
Related Reading
Further reading on the same theme from the JMVRA blog.
Publishing Services: Legitimate Help vs Red Flags
Read the guide RelatedTypes of Research Journals and Articles
Read the guide RelatedChoosing a Journal: A 7-Step Scoring Framework
Read the guide RelatedUnderstanding Plagiarism in Research Papers: Types, Detection Methods and Threshold Control
Read the guide RelatedSimilarity Check Service for Papers & Theses
Read the guide RelatedTurning a PhD Thesis into a Journal Article: A Practical Guide
Read the guideKeep Reading on the JMVRA Blog
This guide belongs to the JMVRA journal blog, which offers practical advice on publishing, indexing, metrics and research integrity, written to be checkable instead of promotional.
