Text-Reuse Review, in the open

The same wording. Two opposite findings.

A similarity score would return the same number for the first two examples below: the shared wording is character-for-character identical. A text-reuse review does not stop there. It names the source, locates the passage in both texts, reads the citation and the quotation marks around it, and only then says what needs doing.

Fixed public example · 2026-08-03.1

What the review actually does

It locates, it does not estimate.

Every finding carries the passage in your draft, the passage in the source, and the character positions of both. You can point at it.

It identifies the work.

A finding names the document, its revision and its locator, so the source can be opened and checked independently.

It reads the attribution.

Quotation marks and citation are assessed together with the match. Correctly quoted and cited wording is not surfaced as a problem.

It says what to do.

Each finding ends in an action — look at this, review the citation, or nothing. No verdict, no score, no automatic rewrite.

Why a percentage is not a finding

A similarity display measures overlap across a whole document and leaves the interpretation to you — or to whoever receives the report. It cannot distinguish a quoted, cited sentence from an unattributed one, because at the character level they are the same sentence.

Examples 01 and 02 share exactly the same wording. One needs work, the other is correct scholarship. That difference is the product.

01

Borrowed and unmarked

In your draft

Readers should keep one caveat in mind before interpreting the table. Statistical significance does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result, and the effect reported here is small.

In the source

Statistical significance does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result.

The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose · American Statistical Association · 2016

Principle 5 · DOI 10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

Open the public source ↗

Shared wording93 characters verbatim · draft 70–163 · source 0–93

Recorded assessment
Relation
identical wordingexact_reuse
Citation
no citation at this passageabsent
Quotation
no quotation marksunquoted
Context
attribution missing or wrongwrong_or_missing_citation
Action
show this firstsurface_high_priority_source_evidence

The draft carries a sentence from the source word for word, with no quotation marks and no citation at that passage.

Nothing here signals to a reader that the wording belongs to someone else. That is the case a review exists for.

Quote it and cite it, or write the point in your own words. NotaVera changes nothing on its own.

02

Borrowed and attributed

In your draft

The association is explicit on this point: “Statistical significance does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result” (Wasserstein & Lazar, 2016, principle 5).

In the source

Statistical significance does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result.

The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose · American Statistical Association · 2016

Principle 5 · DOI 10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

Open the public source ↗

Shared wording93 characters verbatim · draft 44–137 · source 0–93

Recorded assessment
Relation
identical wordingexact_reuse
Citation
citation present and resolved to this sourceresolved_in_scope
Quotation
quoted exactlyquoted_exact
Context
valid direct quotationvalid_direct_quotation
Action
do not showdo_not_surface

Reference in the draftWasserstein, R. L., & Lazar, N. A. (2016). The American Statistician, 70(2), 129–133.

The same sentence, this time inside quotation marks and followed by a citation that resolves to this exact source.

Quotation, citation and match agree. Correct scholarship is not a finding, so the wording alert is suppressed.

Nothing. This passage is not surfaced to you at all.

03

Same subject, own sentence

In your draft

A small p-value says little about how large the underlying effect is, and nothing about whether a clinician should care.

In the source

Statistical significance does not measure the size of an effect or the importance of a result.

The ASA Statement on p-Values: Context, Process, and Purpose · American Statistical Association · 2016

Principle 5 · DOI 10.1080/00031305.2016.1154108

Open the public source ↗

Shared wordingNo verbatim overlap. The candidate comes from meaning, not from characters.

Recorded assessment
Relation
similar in meaning onlysemantic_candidate
Citation
not applicable herenot_applicable
Quotation
not applicable herenot_applicable
Context
same topic, independently writtensame_topic_independent_writing
Action
show as a candidate for review onlysurface_semantic_candidate

The draft makes a related point without reusing any wording. There is no verbatim overlap to locate.

Writing about the same thing is not reuse. A candidate like this is offered for review only and never treated as evidence.

Read it if you want to. It carries no obligation.

Draft and source passage are shown in the language of the source.

What this does not claim

This view is a fixed example, not a scan of your work. A text-reuse review compares your draft against the library you selected and processed yourself. It cannot see what is not in that library, it does not certify originality, and it makes no statement about how any other institution or service will assess your text.

Check a document