- CFA Exams
- CFA Exam: Dec. 2020 Level 1
- Study Session 1. Ethical and Professional Standards
- Reading 3. Guidance for Standards I-VII
- Subject 3. Standard I (C) Misrepresentation
CFA Practice Question
There are 361 practice questions for this study session.
I. Citing quotations said to be attributable to "leading analysts" or "investment experts" without specific reference
II. Presenting statistical forecasts by others with the sources identified but without the qualifying statements that may have been used by the originator
III. Using factual information published by a recognized financial statistics reporting service without acknowledgment
IV. Making a verbal comment at a meeting with associates giving the impression that analysis is original when in reality it is attributable to another analyst
User Contributed Comments 18You need to log in first to add your comment.
Note, that II is plagerism because you have not given a clear view of teh individuals analysis as you have missed out his underlying assumptions which do not reflect his model yet you have quoted him as the originator
ya II needs to be paid attention. i thought it was not an act of plagiarism.
II is questionable. It's not plagerism per se; it's distorting the truth.
I agree with bloctrader. This would not be plagerism, rather it would be misrepresentation. I think there is an important difference.
II is not plagiarism by definition, but nonetheless a violation of 1C. Moreover, per the updated standards, this concept is included as a form of plagiarism. Thus: I, II, and IV are correct.
II is plagiarism since it is a statistical FORECAST by another analyst
Even if II is a statistical forecast, you've identified its source, therefore it is only plagiarism because you've omitted the qualifying statements.
Is it as per the updated standards, that missing the qualifying statements is also plagiarism? Any pg# references shall be appreciated.
II??? I guess he should have put their quotes in there also.
What if the quotations were fictitious ?
It's more like omitting something important - a misrepresentation.
We too thought II is misrepresentation, I guess whatever answer CFA likes is the right one???
II is a bit confusing. if it changed to "...without qualifying the statement and analysis that have been used by the originator", then it should be considered plagerism.because you just copied other's work without making any effort to prove it.
II seems really confusing.Exclusion of qualifying statement give a sense of not trying to attribute.
II is still plagarize because first its statsical data (might not be true) and second without informing the originator (copy)
You guys are thinking too hard. It's whatever CFA has in there standards of practice handbook and that correct. Stop trying to think logically.
sometimes there are overlap on the standards.. need to refer to the textbook
2 isn't plagiarism, it's diligence and reasonable basis. On the test I'm answering 1 and 4. And it's "their" not "there", gill.