Academic Dishonesty: Recommendations for the Future of Higher Education

The culture of academic dishonesty has become a common practice among students across numerous college campuses. It is imperative to address the policies designed to clearly define plagiarism and academic integrity, as they are not universally understood. The authors explore how academic dishonesty and academic integrity are defined at varying institutions and compare and contrast how such policy violations are addressed by campus administrators. The authors propose recommendations for campus administrators and policymakers to redefine best practices for faculty and staff to instill a culture of academic integrity on college campuses

Academic dishonesty: an empirical study of personal beliefs and values of undergraduate students in Malaysia

The relationship between academic dishonesty and personal beliefs and values has been studied in many Western countries. However, the relationship between these variables have not been widely examined among higher education students in Malaysia. The purpose of this study is to determine the influence of personal beliefs and values, which consist of idealism, relativism and religious faith, on undergraduate students' academic dishonesty. A total of 2447 undergraduate students from four research universities in Malaysia participated in this study. The findings revealed that personal beliefs and values are significantly related to academic dishonesty. This study also indicated that idealism and religious faith are negatively related with academic dishonesty. Meanwhile, no significant relationship exists between relativism and academic dishonesty. Furthermore, the study found, after controlling for social desirability, idealism is the highest contributor to academic dishonesty. Based on the findings, it can be concluded that idealism and religious faith are important deterrents to academic dishonesty

Elucidating the associations between achievement goals and academic dishonesty: a meta-analysis

Academic dishonesty is a pervasive problem undermining the effectiveness of educational institutions. From a motivational perspective, researchers have proposed achievement goals as antecedents of academic dishonesty. Empirical findings corroborate the notion that mastery goals (focus on learning and competence development) are negatively linked to academic dishonesty. However, even though theoretical considerations suggest positive links between performance goals (focus on competence demonstration) and academic dishonesty, empirical findings are mixed. To provide a better understanding of how goals matter for academic dishonesty, we conducted three-level meta-analyses encompassing 163 effect sizes from 33 studies and a total of 19,787 participants. We found a disproportional use of correlational designs (using self-report measures of academic dishonesty) and personal goal measures (opposed to surrounding goal structures). Evidence of publication bias was not found. Our results confirmed the expected negative associations between mastery goals and academic dishonesty and revealed heterogenous findings for performance goals, with indications of positive associations within behavioral and intentional dishonesty measures, but not within self-reports. To further clarify the associations between achievement goals and academic dishonesty, we call for more methodological rigor in the measurement of goals and dishonesty as well as multi-methods approaches when investigating their interplay

Student’s Attitudes toward Academic Dishonesty: An Exploration

Academic dishonesty in college/university classrooms is widely recognized as a serious problem (Offstein and Chory 2017). Studies indicate that academic dishonesty is pervasive. Klein, Levenburg, McKendall, and Mothersell (2007), report 40-80 percent of college students are involved in academic dishonesty, whereas McCabe, Butterfield, and Treviňo (2012), report 65-87 percent involvement. Studies also report that cheating activity is increasing (Forsha 2017; Pérez-Peňa 2012), facilitated by increasing levels of tolerance (where instances of academic dishonesty are overlooked by classroom instructors (Coren 2011)), and advances in technology (Best and Shirley 2018). Consequently, academic dishonesty has become an increasingly important area of concern and, likewise, an important area of study (Robinson and Glanzer 2017). Academic dishonesty is not a victimless activity. With the growth of cheating activity, the integrity of higher education is increasingly being questioned (Drye, Lomo-David, and Snyder 2018). Pervasive academic dishonesty prevents academic institutions from being able to certify that graduates have gained a specific level of knowledge and ability from their education (Yu, Glanzer, Johnson, Sriram, and Moore 2018). Academic dishonesty has also been connected with a number of other undesirable activities (Biswas 2014), including unethical work behaviors (Harding, Carpenter, Finelli, and Passow 2004). Several studies suggest that academic dishonesty primes students for continuing dishonesty in their subsequent employment (e.g., Harding, Carpenter, Finelli, and Passow 2004; Hsiao and Yang 2011; Nonis and Swift 2001; Yang, Huang, and Chen 2013). Consequently, recent highly publicized business scandals have focused renewed attention on cheating activities in the classroom (Rakovski and Levy 2007). Past ethics research has explored many important issues involving academic dishonesty, including the effectiveness of various tactics to reduce the incidence of academic dishonesty. Examples of these tactics include the implementation/enforcement of honor codes (McCabe, Treviño, and Butterfield 2001; Tatum and Schwartz 2017), required ethics courses (Medeiros et al. 2017), ethics instruction integrated into discipline-specific coursework (Desplaces, Melchar, Beauvais, and Bosco 2007), campus climate (Molar 2015), and the activities of faculty to fight dishonesty (Coalter, Lim, and Wanorie 2007). The attitudes of students toward academic dishonesty have also received a significant amount of research attention (e.g., Johns and Strand 2007). An area that has not received the same level of research attention involves the effects that students’ perceptions of the ethicality of their academic environment have on their attitudes toward academic dishonesty. Specifically, do students’ perceptions of the ethicality of their college/university, their faculty, and their student body affect their attitudes toward academic dishonesty? This is an important area of study since if students’ attitudes toward academic dishonesty are affected by their perceptions of the ethicality of their institution and their colleagues, it may be possible to affect students’ participation in academic dishonesty by affecting their perceptions of their school environment. To explore this issue, first, student academic dishonesty in higher education is examined. Second, hypotheses are developed and tested. Finally, conclusions are drawn

HELLFIRE AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY: AN EMPIRICAL EVALUATION OF THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGIOUS ORIENTATION ON ACADEMIC DEVIANCE

Academic dishonesty has long been considered a critical issue that threatens to undermine the very integrity of the educational process. This issue has taken on increased importance in an era in which higher education that has been characterized by calls for increased institutional accountability. While past studies have shed light on the issue of academic dishonesty, there are still a number of critical variables pertaining to student cheating that have yet to be examined. This exploratory study examined whether religious orientation influences three variables related to academic dishonesty; student perceptions of the prevalence of academic dishonesty, general student attitudes toward academic dishonesty, or student involvement in acts of academic dishonesty. The investigation proposed that religious orientation would have a significant influence on all three of these variables. The study involved 417 undergraduate college students attending a large public university during the summer 2009. Participants were asked to submit an anonymous online survey which consisted of four preexisting scales that measured religious orientation, perceptions regarding the prevalence of academic dishonesty, perceived opportunity to cheat, and general attitudes toward academic dishonesty. Variables pertaining to religious orientation were defined by the work of Allport (1950) and grouped religious orientation as being intrinsic, extrinsic, indiscriminately anti-religious, and indiscriminately pro-religious. These independent variables were tested against the dependent variables using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests. Results of the study indicated statistically significant differences between the religious orientations and general attitudes toward academic dishonesty and rates of involvement in academic dishonesty. However, the study also indicated that there were no significant differences between the religious orientation groups and perceptions regarding the prevalence of academic dishonesty. Collectively, the results supported the contention that religious orientation can influence some aspects of academic dishonesty and that religion can act as a conforming social institution in this respect. The study also indicates that general religious orientation was far from being a controlling or defining factor in academic dishonesty and that many interacting factors contribute to students decisions to cheat

The Dark Side of Creativity: Original Thinkers Can be More Dishonest

Creativity is a common aspiration for individuals, organizations, and societies. Here, however, we test whether creativity increases dishonesty. We propose that a creative personality and creativity primes promote individuals' motivation to think outside the box and that this increased motivation leads to unethical behavior. In four studies, we show that participants with creative personalities who scored high on a test measuring divergent thinking tended to cheat more (Study 1); that dispositional creativity is a better predictor of unethical behavior than intelligence (Study 2); and that participants who were primed to think creatively were more likely to behave dishonestly because of their creativity motivation (Study 3) and greater ability to justify their dishonest behavior (Study 4). Finally, a field study constructively replicates these effects and demonstrates that individuals who work in more creative positions are also more morally flexible (Study 5). The results provide evidence for an association between creativity and dishonesty, thus highlighting a dark side of creativity.creativity, creative thinking, dishonesty, intelligence, unethical behavior

The Prediction of Religiosity on Students’ Academic Dishonesty

Purpose – The relationship between students’ level of religiosity with their academic dishonesty in previous research was found inconsistent. The purpose of the present study is to clarify the relationship between religiosity with academic dishonesty. Design/methods/approach – This study implemented a correlational design that involved 251 (60,6% female) Islamic High School students in Batang District, Central Java, selected by using cluster random sampling. Data on religiosity was collected using the Centrality of Religiosity Scale (TCR), and academic dishonesty data were assessed using the Academic Dishonesty Scale (ADS). Findings – The results showed that religiosity predicted a decrease in academic dishonesty. Furthermore, this study also confirms that there are three dimensions (out of 5 dimensions of religiosity) that significantly predict academic dishonesty, namely ideology, private practice, and experience, while the other two dimensions, namely intellect and public practice, have no correlation with academic dishonesty. Research implications/limitations – The implications of these findings are presented for strengthening collaboration between school counselors and religious education teachers to decrease students’ academic dishonesty through strengthening the level of student religiosity in its various dimensions so that religiosity is not seen as just a ritual of worship. Originality/value – This study has clarified and confirmed the relationship between religiosity and academic dishonesty, particularly the three dimensions of religiosity that contribute to explaining academic dishonesty

Academic Dishonesty in Medical Schools

Background: Dishonesty can be found in all aspects of human interaction and is known to be rampant in educational institutions. Little is known about it in medical training and the characteristics of those involved. This study explores the factors that drive academic dishonesty among aspiring doctors.Objective: To establish the factors driving academic dishonesty among senior medical students.Design: Cross sectional survey using self-administered questionnaire.Setting: The School of Medicine, Moi University.Subjects: One hundred and fifty-six students in the clinical years of study.Results: Those who had past experience with academic dishonesty had a 70.4% chance of cheating in university compared to 58.9% for those not previously exposed. The odds ratio was 3.6 for males to be involved in academic dishonesty than females. Being aware of academic dishonesty in the Medical School made it 86.3% likely that a student would participate. Having witnessed academic dishonesty in progress was the strongest predictor of likely involvement in cheating.Conclusion: The cheating medical student in the clinical years is likely to be a male in the early part of the study with similar previous experience, has witnessed cheating and believes that the classmates are actively equally involved.Key words: Academic Dishonesty, Medical Training, Medical Student

Academic Dishonesty – A preliminary researchers’ view

Increasingly academe is facing the challenge of dealing with allegations of plagiarism and academic dishonesty. Academic dishonesty plagues both the degree acquisition process as well and the publishing process. Academic dishonesty within the university space has been clouded in mystery, as many universities are not willing to break the code of silence. However, within the academic publishing space, several respectable journals had to withdraw published papers citing academic dishonesty as a concern. At the core of academic dishonesty is the researcher and their perceptions of issues affecting academic dishonesty. The purpose of this research is to develop a better understanding of researchers’ attitudes to issues of academic dishonesty. This study is quantitative in nature and primary data in the form of Likert scale questions were collected from developing researchers. The questionnaire data were statistically analysed, and a framework was developed to outline emerging researchers’ perceptions of academic dishonesty. Key findings included academic dishonesty is influenced by several issues such as academic pressure, electronic deterrents, writing challenges, outsourcing, data challenges, plagiarism, database challenges, and electronic sources. This is important because by better understanding researchers’ perceptions to academic dishonesty, (1) appropriate training interventions can be implemented (2) higher quality research will be produced and (3) research funding will not be wasted

Academic Dishonesty

The purpose of the Academic Dishonesty Policy is to provide guidance on the regulations for Academic Dishonesty as well as provide the policies and procedures concerning violations of the Academic Dishonesty regulations