I received the second version of a manuscript I had reviewed previously. I gave very thorough feedback the first time and recommended accepting after major revisions. The other two reviewers gave minimal feedback, but were critical of the overall study, and suggested minor revisions the first time around. It appears the authors just did some rewriting according to my feedback.
This particular journal has you highlight your changes so they are apparent. It occurred to me that most of the new text was a little too natural sounding for these non-native speakers from a country in which I have lots of experience. I dug further into this text. Turns out it is almost exactly copied from the other studies they cite. Friends, this is what we call plagiarism. Because I am familiar with their culture, I understand why they do it and how difficult it is to rewrite something in your own words when it is not your native language. However, this is unacceptable.
My response to the manuscript:
I appreciate the thorough response of the authors to feedback on the previous draft of this manuscript. I think the additions have incorporated the literature into their manuscript well.
However, large portions of the text are plagiarized from previously published studies, and I cannot recommend publishing the manuscript as it is currently written. I am happy to review this manuscript again when the authors have rewritten the text.On the plus side, I no longer felt like I needed to go through and proof-read it, so reviewing the paper was a lot faster than it could have been. One more thing crossed off my list for the weekend...



