Introduction
The literature review is often the chapter with the highest plagiarism risk — not because students cheat, but because summarising others’ work naturally leads to similar phrasing. Indian PhD scholars frequently face this challenge, especially when writing in English about dense academic material. Rewriting what others have already written, while trying to keep it “original,” feels like walking a tightrope. And when Turnitin or URKUND flags large portions of the review, the confusion deepens.
Many scholars in Indian private universities receive little formal guidance on how to paraphrase correctly or balance summary with citation. Some rely heavily on downloaded PDFs or older theses for reference. Others use online paraphrasing tools, which often weaken academic clarity rather than solving the problem.
Reducing plagiarism in your literature review doesn’t mean deleting all citations or using vague, AI-rewritten sentences. It means learning how to engage with existing research — critically, ethically, and in your own voice.
Why the Literature Review Is Vulnerable to Plagiarism
Unlike your methodology or findings, the literature review is entirely built on other people’s work. You are expected to cover major studies, definitions, frameworks, and debates relevant to your research topic. And in doing so, you’ll often be referring to the same sources your peers have read — especially if you’re in a well-studied field like education, management, or social sciences.
For Indian PhD scholars, this leads to common dilemmas:
- How much can I quote?
- What if I paraphrase a sentence, but the structure stays the same?
- If I cite correctly, why does the similarity report still flag it?
In practice, most plagiarism detection tools match string patterns — not intent. So even if your paragraph is well cited, it might be flagged because the language resembles the original source too closely. Universities may allow some similarity in the literature review, but excessive match percentages still raise red flags, especially during final submission or viva scrutiny.
Effective Strategies to Lower Similarity Without Losing Quality
Reducing plagiarism isn’t about lowering the percentage alone — it’s about improving how you engage with the material. This requires more than just rephrasing. It involves reading with understanding, summarising with clarity, and building your academic voice slowly.
Here are strategies that Indian scholars have found useful:
1. Read First, Write Later
Many students read a PDF and start typing immediately — with the source open beside them. This leads to accidental replication of phrases or structures. Instead, try reading a section fully, closing the source, and writing a brief summary in your own words. This breaks the dependence on exact wording.
2. Don’t Write to Fill Pages
In private universities, scholars sometimes feel pressure to make the literature review longer to “look serious.” But copying definitions or explanations just to add volume often leads to plagiarism. Focus on why a study matters to your work — not just what it says.
3. Use a Mix of Paraphrasing and Commentary
Don’t just rewrite others’ words — comment on them. For instance:
“While Sharma (2016) argues that rural education suffers due to poor infrastructure, this study also considers the role of policy gaps.”
This kind of sentence both references the original and adds your own thinking, reducing direct similarity.
4. Learn Academic Paraphrasing, Not Just Synonyms
Tools like Grammarly or QuillBot may help you change some words, but they rarely teach how to restructure. Take time to learn how academic writers paraphrase — often by changing sentence order, focusing on different aspects, or summarising broadly.
5. Use Citation Tools
Free tools like Zotero or Mendeley can help you cite consistently. Inconsistent or missing citations are a common reason for accidental plagiarism in Indian theses. A tool helps track sources, manage style guides, and ensure nothing is missed.
6. Avoid Copying from Other Theses
Many scholars borrow literature reviews from older submissions at their university. This might seem safe, but it creates two problems: the content may itself be flawed, and duplication across theses is now detectable through cross-institutional databases.
7. Ask for Feedback Early
In many Indian institutions, guide feedback arrives late in the process. Try sharing your draft literature review early — even with a consultant or peer — to catch patterns that may trigger high similarity scores.
Why Plagiarism Reports Should Not Be the Only Focus
Many scholars obsess over lowering the similarity percentage — sometimes at the cost of clarity. They delete useful content, break up quotations awkwardly, or use vague paraphrasing that reduces academic strength.
But a literature review with 12% similarity and strong citation is far better than one with 3% similarity and no clarity. Reviewers — especially during viva — care about how well you understood the literature, not just how well you avoided detection.
In fact, Indian evaluators are increasingly aware of poorly rewritten content. Overuse of paraphrasing tools, AI rewriters, or awkward sentence constructions are seen as signs of inexperience. What earns trust is writing that shows you have read, understood, and thought about the material — and expressed it with honesty.
Conclusion
For Indian PhD students navigating dense academic material, writing an original literature review can feel overwhelming. But originality doesn’t mean saying something no one has ever said. It means presenting known ideas with your understanding, in your own academic voice.
Copy-pasting may lower your workload in the short term — but it damages your credibility and confidence in the long run. With small but consistent efforts, you can write a literature review that passes plagiarism checks, satisfies your university, and — most importantly — reflects your academic maturity.
A similarity report can flag overlap. But only you can ensure that your words reflect genuine engagement with your field. That is the essence of good scholarship — and a literature review worth defending.