This book offers information about what constitutes dishonesty or lying and why it occurs. Based on the author's professional experiences as an attorney and a psychologist, he explains reasons why lying is a human frailty and offers guidance on how a person can detect lies, nip them in the bud, and maintain personal defenses against being treated in a harmful manner. The book is wrapped up with comments about how the control and elimination of influence from dishonest people enhances (...) self-fulfillment, and how this will lead to personal health, happiness, and positive social relationships. (shrink)

Academic dishonesty is an insidious problem that besets most tertiary institutions, where considerable resources are expended to prevent and manage students' dishonest actions within academia. Using a mixed retrospective and prospective design this research investigated Gottfredson and Hirschi's self-control theory as a possible explanation for academic dishonesty in 264 university students. The relationship between academic dishonesty and general criminality was also examined. A significant but small to moderate relationship between academic dishonesty and general criminality was present, (...) including correlations with general dishonesty, violent crime and drug offending subcategories. These findings suggested that a general criminological theory may be of use in explaining academic dishonesty, but the overall ability of self-control variables to explain academic dishonesty was not strong. Controlled logistic regressions indicated that a significant positive association with academic dishonesty was only present for one of 6 self-control subscales (self-centeredness), and even this association was only present in the prospective study component. A strong relationship between past and future academic dishonesty was present. Implications of the study for institutions are discussed. (shrink)

Background: The knowledge of scientific dishonesty is scarce and heterogeneous. Therefore this study investigates the experiences with and the attitudes towards various forms of scientific dishonesty among PhD-students at the medical faculties of all Norwegian universities.MethodAnonymous questionnaire distributed to all post graduate students attending introductory PhD-courses at all medical faculties in Norway in 2010/2011. Descriptive statistics. Results: 189 of 262 questionnaires were returned (72.1%). 65% of the respondents had not, during the last year, heard or read about researchers (...) who committed scientific dishonesty. One respondent had experienced pressure to fabricate and to falsify data, and one had experienced pressure to plagiarize data. On average 60% of the respondents were uncertain whether their department had a written policy concerning scientific conduct. About 11% of the respondents had experienced unethical pressure concerning the order of authors during the last 12 months. 10% did not find it inappropriate to report experimental data without having conducted the experiment and 38% did not find it inappropriate to try a variety of different methods of analysis to find a statistically significant result. 13% agreed that it is acceptable to selectively omit contradictory results to expedite publication and 10% found it acceptable to falsify or fabricate data to expedite publication, if they were confident of their findings. 79% agreed that they would be willing to report misconduct to a responsible official. Conclusion: Although there is less scientific dishonesty reported in Norway than in other countries, dishonesty is not unknown to doctoral students. Some forms of scientific misconduct are considered to be acceptable by a significant minority. There was little awareness of relevant policies for scientific conduct, but a high level of willingness to report misconduct. (shrink)

‘Scientific dishonesty’ implies the fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research or in reporting research results. A questionnaire was given to postgraduate students at the medical faculties in Sweden who attended a course in research ethics during the academic year 2008/2009 and 58% answered (range 29%–100%). Less than one-third of the respondents wrote that they had heard about scientific dishonesty in the previous 12 months. Pressure, concerning in what order the author should be mentioned, was (...) reported by about 1 in 10 students. We suggest that all departments conducting research should have a written policy about acceptable research behaviour and that all doctoral students should be informed of the content of this policy. Participants in the research groups concerned should also be required to analyse published articles about scientific dishonesty and critically discuss what could be done about unethical conduct. (shrink)

The problem of academic dishonesty in general and exam cheating in particular, has been ubiquitous in schools, colleges, and universities around the world. This paper reports on the findings from teachers’ and students’ experiences and perceptions of exam cheating at Nepali schools, colleges, and universities. In so doing, the paper highlights the challenges of maintaining academic integrity in Nepali education systems. Based on qualitative research design, the study data were collected by employing semi-structured interviews with the teachers and the (...) students. Findings from the study indicated that over-emphasized value given to marks/grades and the nature of exam questions among others were the predominant factors. Our findings contribute to the practical understanding that academic institutions in Nepal have largely failed to communicate the value of academic honesty and integrity to the students of all levels of education despite the increasing prevalence of exam cheating. Therefore, exam cheating requires urgent attention from academic institutions, educators, and education leaders to educate students about the long-term educational and social values of academic honesty and integrity. (shrink)

BackgroundInstitutions of higher learning are persistently struggling with issues of academic dishonesty such as plagiarism, despite the availability of university policies and guidelines for upholding academic integrity.MethodologyThis was a descriptive qualitative study conducted on 37 students of a Healthcare Ethics course at an Australian tertiary institution from February 2016 to October 2018. The purpose of the study was to explore the reasons for plagiarism detected the TurnitinR plagiarism checking software and extensive review of manuscripts. The interviews were conducted in (...) private rooms and in strict confidence. Thematic analysis was manually done.ResultsFour major themes namely, lack of interest; pressure of time with competing priorities; lack of understanding of the policy on academic honesty, and “the determined students” were identified. Sub themes under lack of interest were lack of preparation and effort, low self-efficacy, poor studying techniques, and convenience of internet sources. Under pressure of time, the subthemes were, misplaced priorities, procrastination, high workloads, poor planning, competing interests, and the perception of availability of time at the start of the semester. Regarding lack of understanding of the policy on academic honesty, the subthemes identified were, lake of awareness of plagiarism, lack of awareness of acceptable similarity, conflicting messages from tutors and confusion with high school learning. The determined students were those that either made all effort to reduce plagiarism but still remained high, used the another language at home other than English, had poor paraphrasing techniques or lacked resources for English language editing.ConclusionThere are varied and diverse reasons for plagiarism. There is a need to systematically reinforce and educate students on issues pertaining to academic dishonesty and their associated implications. (shrink)

This study investigated the associations between academic dishonesty, perceptions toward cheating and academic self-handicapping in 572 Greek University students using an online anonymous questionnaire. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was employed to form subgroups of students based on academic dishonesty – related constructs. The results showed that academic dishonesty was higher in males and among Sciences and Economics/ICT majors, and that it was associated with students’ perceptions and a pattern of dysfunctional academic behavior. Moreover, students majoring in Science (...) and Economics/ICT reported higher levels of witnessing a peer cheating, which was positively linked to academic dishonesty. LPA revealed three groups of students with low, medium, and high academic dishonesty-related variable scores. The implications of these findings for understanding how perceptions about cheating and academic self-handicapping are linked to academic dishonesty are discussed. The study also suggests some possible interventions to prevent and reduce academic dishonesty based on the emerged student profiles. (shrink)

Over the past few decades, a body of research has developed examining the academic dishonesty of university and college students. While research has explored academic dishonesty amongst American criminal justice and policing students, no research has specifically focused on investigating the dynamics and correlates of academic dishonesty amongst Australian criminology students. This study drew upon data obtained from a survey of 79 undergraduate criminal justice and policing students studying at an Australian university. Overall, the results suggest that (...) male gender, viewing academic dishonesty as less serious and holding justifications for engaging in this type of behaviour were significant predictors of self-reported academic dishonesty. The findings suggest that more proactive strategies need to be implemented by universities to prevent student involvement in academic dishonesty. (shrink)

Previous research indicates that students in engineering self-report cheating in college at higher rates than those in most other disciplines. Prior work also suggests that participation in one deviant behavior is a reasonable predictor of future deviant behavior. This combination of factors leads to a situation where engineering students who frequently participate in academic dishonesty are more likely to make unethical decisions in professional practice. To investigate this scenario, we propose the hypotheses that (1) there are similarities in the (...) decision-making processes used by engineering students when considering whether or not to participate in academic and professional dishonesty, and (2) prior academic dishonesty by engineering students is an indicator of future decisions to act dishonestly. Our sample consisted of undergraduate engineering students from two technically-oriented private universities. As a group, the sample reported working full-time an average of six months per year as professionals in addition to attending classes during the remaining six months. This combination of both academic and professional experience provides a sample of students who are experienced in both settings. Responses to open-ended questions on an exploratory survey indicate that students identify common themes in describing both temptations to cheat or to violate workplace policies and factors which caused them to hesitate in acting unethically, thus supporting our first hypothesis and laying the foundation for future surveys having forced-choice responses. As indicated by the responses to forced-choice questions for the engineering students surveyed, there is a relationship between self-reported rates of cheating in high school and decisions to cheat in college and to violate workplace policies; supporting our second hypothesis. Thus, this exploratory study demonstrates connections between decision-making about both academic and professional dishonesty. If better understood, these connections could lead to practical approaches for encouraging ethical behavior in the academic setting, which might then influence future ethical decision-making in workplace settings. (shrink)

Academic dishonesty among students at colleges and universities has been a serious problem all over the world. Due to advances in information and communication technologies, particularly the Internet, the problem has become more severe in the past two decades. This is especially serious among undergraduate students. Very little research has been done in this field in Botswana and Zambia. This study was an attempt in this direction. This paper presents the findings of the study carried out with second year (...) students at the University of Botswana and the University of Zambia. The main objectives of the research were to investigate students' attitudes toward academic dishonesty, frequency of cheating, cheating methods used, and motives for cheating in a local university context. To pursue the study a questionnaire survey was used. The results revealed that students had a high knowledge of various forms of academic dishonesty; and were of the opinion that academic dishonesty devalues academic qualifications. Academic dishonesty was widely practiced; yet, it was not adequately dealt with. The paper recommends that various stakeholders should collaborate to continually educate and discourage students from indulging in academic dishonesty. (shrink)

We investigated the definition, prevalence, perceived prevalence and severity of, as well as justifications for and expected responses to, academic dishonesty at the graduate level in a sample of 246 graduate students, 49 faculty, and 20 administrators. Between 2.5% and 55.1% of students self-reported engaging in academically dishonest behaviors, depending on the nature of the behavior. Students and faculty rated 40 examples of academically dishonest behaviors similarly in terms of severity, but faculty tended to underestimate the prevalence of academic (...) dishonesty. Students and faculty also reported how they would idealistically and realistically expect themselves to respond to cheating situations. Students rated 21 behaviors in terms of their likeliness to increase or decrease academically dishonest behavior. Suggestions are given for developing a climate or culture of academic integrity to address academic dishonesty. (shrink)

An important moral category—dishonest speech—has been overlooked in theoretical ethics despite its importance in legal, political, and everyday social exchanges. Discussion in this area has instead been fixated on a binary debate over the contrast between lying and ‘merely misleading’. Some see lying as a distinctive wrong; others see it as morally equivalent to deliberately omitting relevant truths, falsely insinuating, or any other species of attempted verbal deception. Parties to this debate have missed the relevance to their disagreement of the (...) notion of communicative dishonesty. Communicative dishonesty need not take the form of a lie, yet its wrongness does not reduce to the wrongness of seeking to deceive. This paper therefore proposes a major shift of attention away from the lying/misleading debate and towards the topic of communicative dishonesty. Dishonesty is not a simple notion to define, however. It presupposes a difficult distinction between what is and is not expressed in a given utterance. This differs from the more familiar distinction between what is and is not said, the distinction at the heart of the lying/misleading debate. This paper uses an idea central to speech act theory to characterize dishonesty in terms of the utterer’s communicative intentions, and applies the resulting definition to a variety of contexts. (shrink)

Is academic integrity research presented from a positive integrity standpoint? This paper uses Natural Language Processing techniques to explore a data set of 8,507 academic integrity papers published between 1904 and 2019.Two main techniques are used to linguistically examine paper titles: bigram analysis and sentiment analysis. The analysis sees the three main bigrams used in paper titles as being “academic integrity”, “academic dishonesty” and “plagiarism detection”. When only highly cited papers are considered, negative integrity bigrams dominate positive integrity bigrams. (...) For example, the 100 most cited academic integrity papers of all time are three times more likely to have “academic dishonesty” included in their titles than “academic integrity”. Similarly, sentiment analysis sees negative sentiment outperforming positive sentiment in the most cited papers.The history of academic integrity research is seen to place the field at a disadvantage due to negative portrayals of integrity. Despite this, analysis shows that change towards positive integrity is possible. The titles of papers by the ten most prolific academic integrity researchers are found to use positive terminology in more cases that not. This suggests an approach for emerging academic integrity researchers to model themselves after. (shrink)

This study presents the findings from aninternational survey of college students whichexamined perceptions and attitudes towarddishonesty in academic and business contexts. Data were collected from undergraduate studentsstudying business and economics in eighttransitional economies of Eastern Europe andCentral Asia and from students in the UnitedStates. The results indicate that academiccheating is a common activity in all of thecountries surveyed. Even though most studentsreported fearing the punishment of beingcaught, substantial numbers of studentsindicated that academic cheating is sociallyacceptable and not ethically wrong. When (...) askedto rate their perceived degree of dishonestywith respect to behavior in an academic settingrelative to analogous behavior in a businesssetting, students in both the United States andthe transitional economies viewed dishonesty ina business context more severely thandishonesty in an academic context. Theevidence also suggests that when compared tostudents in the transitional economies,American students apply a relatively higherstandard of honesty toward behavior in both theacademic and business settings. (shrink)

The present study aimed to investigate academic dishonesty among college students in Indonesia, as well as exploring various aspects of morality that may affect academic dishonesty. This study drew upon data obtained from an online survey of 574 students from diploma, undergraduate, and postgraduate levels of study in Indonesia. The data revealed a high prevalence of academic dishonesty in Indonesian college students and indicated that the level of academic dishonesty is affected by gender, college origin, and (...) study level. Regressions confirmed that higher academic dishonesty is associated with lower moral integrity and higher level of moral disengagement, as expected, but not with moral foundations. We also present detailed examinations on the three forms of academic dishonesty and discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings. (shrink)

This descriptive and cross-sectional study aims to evaluate academic dishonesty among university nursing students in Turkey. The study’s sample included 196 students. Two instruments were used for gathering data. The first instrument, a questionnaire, which included some socio-demographic variables (age, class, gender, education, family structure, parents’ attitude and educators’ attitude) formed the first part. The second part included the Academic Dishonesty Tendency Scale developed by Eminoğlu and Nartgün. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Kruskall Wallis, One-way (...) Anova, t- test and Mann-Whitney U test. It was found that academic dishonesty was at medium-level (2.60—3.39) in nursing students. (shrink)

Academic dishonesty that involves the use of any prohibited means for gaining unfair advantage academically has become a global problem in educational institutions. Limited studies have been conducted to explore the significance of personality with reference to academic misconduct. The present study was conducted to find out the different personality correlates as well as predictors of Academic Dishonesty. For this purpose 232 students of undergraduate and graduate courses from different faculties of University of Karachi, Pakistan, with ages ranging (...) between 18-35 years participated in the study. Big Five Inventory 1 was used to measure personality and English version of Academic Dishonesty Tendency Scale2 was used to measure academic dishonesty. Also five questions were developed to measure one more dimension of academic dishonesty which has been observed in local universities i.e., the tendency towards influencing teachers. For statistical analysis, correlation and regression analysis were conducted. Some personality types were found to be associated, and predictors of different dimensions of academic dishonesty. (shrink)

Cooperative relations steeped in honesty and good faith are a necessity for any viable society. This is especially relevant to the police institution because the police are entrusted to promote justice and security. Despite the necessity of societal honesty and good faith, the police institution has embraced deception, dishonesty, and bad faith as tools of the trade for providing security. In fact, it seems that providing security is impossible without using deception and dishonesty during interrogations, undercover operations, pretextual (...) detentions, and other common scenarios. This presents a paradox related to the erosion of public faith in the police institution and the weakening of the police's legitimacy. -/- The book seeks to solve this puzzle by showing that many of our assumptions about policing and security are unjustified. Specifically, they are unjustified in the way many of our assumptions about security were unjustified after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when state institutions embraced a variety of brutal rules and tactics in pursuit of perceived security enhancements. The police are likewise unjustified in their pursuit of many supposed security enhancements that rely on proactive deception, dishonesty, and bad faith. -/- There are compelling reasons to think that the police's widespread use of proactive deception and dishonesty is inconsistent with fundamental norms of political morality regarding fraud and the rule of law. Although there are times and places for such tactics in policing, those times and places should be much more limited than current practices suggest. (shrink)

While there has been much discussion of how the scientific establishment’s culture can engender research misconduct and scientific irreproducibility, this has been discussed much less frequently with respect to the medical profession. Here the authors posit that a lack of self-criticism, an encouragement of novel scientific research generated by the recruitment policies of the UK Royal Training Colleges along with insufficient training in the sciences are core reasons as to why research misconduct and dishonesty prevail within the medical community. (...) Furthermore, the UK General Medical Council’s own data demonstrates a historic inattentiveness to the ease with which doctors can engage in research misconduct. Suggestions are made as to how these issues can be investigated and alternative incentives for career advancement are adumbrated. (shrink)

The data in this special issue are both encouraging and discouraging. On the positive side, researchers are making theoretical breakthroughs into the psychology of the academic cheater, which may result in practical interventions. Yet the studies illustrate the sheer magnitude of the problem and the resources needed to address unethical behavior among the younger members of the American academe. In short, this special issue shows that the "Internet revolution" facilitates new types of academic dishonesty (Sisti, this issue; Stephens, Young, (...) & Calabrese, this issue); that academic cheating is often an intentional, planned act that results from a Machiavellian tendency to neutralize moral sanctions against cheating (Harding, Mayhew, Finelli, & Carpenter, this issue); that motivations to cheat differ across students (Davy, Kincaid, Smith, & Trawick, this issue; Wowra, this issue); and that academic cheating is a symptom of a larger problem (Lovett-Hooper, Komarraju, Weston, & Dollinger, this issue; Wowra, this issue). (shrink)

Untruthfulness is surprisingly common in the U.S. military even though members of the profession are loath to admit it. Further, much of the deception and dishonesty that occurs in the profession of arms is actually encouraged and sanctioned by the military institution. The end result is a profession whose members often hold and propagate a false sense of integrity that prevents the profession from addressing -- or even acknowledging -- the duplicity and deceit throughout the formation. It takes remarkable (...) courage and candor for leaders to admit the gritty shortcomings and embarrassing frailties of the military as an organization in order to better the military as a profession. Such a discussion, however, is both essential and necessary for the health of the military profession"--Publisher's web site. (shrink)

This study investigated Iranian language students’ perception of and familiarity with plagiarism, their attitudes toward their professors regarding this issue, and their reasons for doing so. The participants were 122 undergraduate and graduate language students in Translation, Literature, TEFL, and Linguistics who filled out a validated and piloted questionnaire. Overall, the results indicated that students had different views about the definition of plagiarism and plagiarism was mostly perceived by students as using someone else’s words as if they were their own (...) rather than taking someone’s ideas without permission. It was also found that in their academic career, students mostly consider copying a completed assignment of their friend as an act of academic dishonesty. In addition, they mostly argued that professors at universities guess about who might have done plagiarism instead of checking it themselves and they used different strategies to detect plagiarism. The study also indicated that Iranian students had different reasons for plagiarism but they mostly plagiarize because of easiness of plagiarism. Finally, the results of the survey showed that the majority learned about plagiarism from their university professors. (shrink)

It must be considered that a man who only does what everyone of the society to which he belongs would do is not a dishonest man.A lack of confidence in the ability of a tribunal correctly to estimate evidence of states of mind and the like can never be sufficient ground for excluding from enquiry the most fundamental element in a rational and humane criminal code.

Deception is common in the marketplace where individuals pursue self-interests from their perspectives. Extant research suggests that perspective-taking, a cognitive process of putting oneself in other’s situation, increases consumers’ ethical tolerance for marketers’ deceptive behaviors. By contrast, the current research demonstrates that consumers who take the dishonest marketers’ perspective become less tolerant of deception when consumers’ moral self-awareness is high. This effect is driven by moral self-other differentiation as consumers contemplate deception from the marketers’ perspective: high awareness of the “moral (...) self” motivates consumers to distance themselves from the “immoral other.” The findings shed new light on how self-morality can vicariously shape social consideration in ethical judgments. (shrink)

Students from a small, private, religious college and a large, public university completed questionnaires asking their perceptions of academic dishonesty at their institution. The questionnaires used a 5-point Likert scale to determine whether the students felt it was acceptable to cheat for a specific reason such as plagiarizing or copying homework both using and not using technology. Between fall 2005 and fall 2013, 1792 usable questionnaires were collected using similar methodology, questionnaires and respondents to control for possible extraneous variables. (...) An analysis of the data provides indications that student acceptance of many types of academic dishonesty has decreased over the past 9 years. (shrink)

We hardly regard politics—certainly not the words of politicians—as a realm where truth and honesty are closely protected. Public ignorance undoubtedly often pairs with politicians' disregard for accuracy to allow lies to pass. It is still galling, though, when political process and public reflection are stubbornly resistant to the obvious. It is more disturbing yet if the ignorance seems almost willing—a deeper kind of dishonesty in and with ourselves.By nature I am neither cynic, nor pessimist, nor one who disdains (...) politics and public life because they can be infused with ignorance. In the last twenty-four months, moreover, I have been encouraged by the distance insurance reform has traveled, notwithstanding .. (shrink)

Lying and deceit are instruments of power, used by social actors in the pursuit of their practices as they seek to maintain social order. All social actors, nurses included, have deceit and dishonesty within their repertoire of practice. Much of this is benign, well intentioned and a function of being sociable and necessary in the pursuit of social order in the healthcare environment. Lying and deceit from a sociological point of view, is a reflection of the different modes of (...) domination that exist within a social space. French philosopher Pierre Bourdieu theorized about the way that symbolic power works within social space. The social structures and the agency of individual actors moving within it are interrelated and interdependent. Bourdieu's ideas will be used to theorize about real clinical experiences where acts of deceit can be identified and a case example will be presented. Nurses are actors in the social space of clinical care, and their world is complex, challenging, and often fraught with the contradictory demands and choices that reflect and influence their behaviours. An exploration of lying and deceit in nursing as an instrument in the modes of domination that persist enables us to challenge some of the assumptions that are made about the motives that cause or tempt nurses to lie as well as to understand the way on which they are sometimes lied to, according to the acts of domination that exist in the field. Lying or acting dishonestly is a powerful act that is intent on retaining stability and social order and could be seen to be a justification of lying and deceit. However, we need to pause and consider, in whose interests are we striving to create social order? Is it in the end about the comfort of patients or for the comfort of professionals? (shrink)

Student academic dishonesty is a pervasive problem for universities all over the world. The development of innovative practices and interventions for decreasing dishonest behaviour requires understanding factors influencing academic dishonesty. Previous research showed that personal, environmental, and situational factors affect dishonest behaviour at a university. The set of factors and the strength of their influence can differ across countries. There is a lack of research on factors affecting student dishonesty in Russia. A sample of 15,159 undergraduate students (...) from eight Russian highly selective universities was surveyed to understand what factors influence their decision to engage in dishonest behaviour. Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour was employed to explain dishonest behaviour among students. The explained variance in the engagement in academic dishonesty equals 48% in the model for the full sample, and reaches 69% in the model for one of the considered institutions. The major findings of this study were: subjective norms appeared to dominate as the strongest predictor of academic dishonesty across the Russian universities; perceived behavioural control, appeared to be positively related to the dishonest behaviour. In the majority of universities, this factor was found to be insignificant. This finding indicates a specific feature of Russian students’ an ethical decision-making process discussed in the last part of the paper. (shrink)

"Dishonesty inspires more euphemisms than copulation or defecation. This helps desensitize us to its implications. In the post-truth era we don't just have truth and lies but a third category of ambiguous statements that are not exactly the truth but fall just short of a lie. Enhanced truth it might be called. Neo-truth . Soft truth . Faux truth . Truth lite ." Deception has become the modern way of life. Where once the boundary line between truth and lies (...) was clear and distinct, it is no longer so. In the post-truth era, deceiving others has become a challenge, a game, a habit. High-profile dissemblers compete for news coverage, from journalists like Jayson Blair and professors like Joseph Ellis to politicians (of all stripes), executives, and "creative" accountants. Research suggests that the average American tells multiple lies on a daily basis, often for no good reason. Not a finger-wagging scolding, The Post-Truth Era is a combination of Ralph Keyes's investigative journalism and solid science. The result is a spirited exploration of why we lie about practically everything and the consequences such casual dishonesty has on society. American society has become permeated from top to bottom by deception. Its consequences for the nature of public discourse, media, business, literature, academia, and politics are profound. With dry humor, passionate fervor, and deep understanding, Ralph Keyes takes us on a tour of a world where truth and honesty are no longer absolutes but mutable, fluid concepts. (shrink)

For over 70 years, research has tackled the issue of academic misconduct in the university setting. However, a review of the literature reveals that (a) consensus on the magnitude of such behavior has not been reached, and, (b) no one with expertise in quantitative methodology has attempted to classify the behaviors that describe cheaters until Ferrell and Daniel proposed the use of the Academic Misconduct Survey (AMS). Even they, following their 1995 study, made a call for the development of understandable (...) constructs in the measurement of cheating. Seventeen years later, the present study sought to produce such constructs. In a series of three phases of data collection, 4,100 participants completed a revised version of the AMS. A factor solution containing five factors proved to be the most interpretable. The five factors are as follows: creative padding, interactive cheating, false personal excuses, taking credit for others’ work, exam cheating. The present paper outlines the constructs proposed and discusses implications in this area for (1) scholars within the area of measurement and (2) educators with regard to student accountability and performance. (shrink)

Few cross-national studies have been conducted on academic dishonesty. The aim of this study was to explore students’ disclosed levels of academic dishonesty between New Zealand and Nigeria. The measures obtained included incidence, acceptability, and justification of dishonest action. It was hypothesized that there would be differences between the two groups and that differences could be explained in terms of deontology, cultural relativism, utilitarianism, rational fair exchange, and/or response bias. There were 844 medical and health science students who (...) participated in the study and completed a questionnaire that explored incidence, acceptability, and justification of dishonest action. A binary logistic regression revealed that age and incidence were significant predictors of country allocation. Nigerian students reported more engagement in dishonest behaviors, and it is argued that these students have diverse cultural expectations, language variances, response strategies, norms, beliefs, and values. Educational interventions are essential to address concerns related to academic dishonesty such as promoting cross-cultural discourse, providing study skills programs, utilizing peer mentoring, creating formal exchange strategies, and endorsing honor codes. (shrink)

Academic dishonesty is a problem that continues to plague universities. Few studies have examined how mind-set and individualism contribute to academic dishonesty. Using structural equation modeling, a model was developed to explain academic dishonesty, which included mind-set, individualistic learning environment, individualism, and motivation to study. A total of 207 university students in Thailand participated. The final model explained 30% of the variance in academic dishonesty. All variables in this study had a negative relationship with academic (...) class='Hi'>dishonesty, indicating that improvements in mind-set, learning environment, and motivation could change perceptions of academic dishonesty. (shrink)

There has been almost nothing written in philosophy on honesty in the past fifty years. This paper contributes one piece to a larger project of trying to change this unfortunate state of affairs. In section one, I outline an original account of the behavioural component of honesty as involving being disposed to not intentionally distort the facts as the person sees them. Section two turns to the vice of deficiency, namely dishonesty, which I suggest is the only vice corresponding (...) to honesty. It has at least five different dimensions, and a person’s character needs to be assessed along all of them before an overall judgment as to her dishonesty can justifiably be made. (shrink)

The prevalence of academic dishonesty is a matter of considerable concern for institutions of higher education everywhere. We explored students’ perceptions of academic dishonesty using Q methodology, which provides insights that are different from those obtained through surveys or interviews. South African students ranked 48 statements, giving reasons why students cheat, on an 11-column grid, anchored by strongly agree and strongly disagree. Q factor analysis was used to identify groups of individuals who share the same perspective. The three (...) perspectives that emerged viewed academic dishonesty as moral transgressions, pressure transgressions, or confused transgressions. These suggest different approaches to addressing the issue. (shrink)

In this study, we examined the role of social learning theory in explaining academic dishonesty among 673 college students in the United States, France, and Greece. We found support for social learning theory such that perceived peer dishonesty was incrementally valid as a predictor of self-reported academic dishonesty across three countries beyond personal factor of conscientiousness and demographic factor of age. Contrary to expectation, perceived penalty for academic cheating received support in the U.S. sample only. Justification for (...) academic dishonesty contributed incremental variance after controlling for other factors including age, conscientiousness, perceived penalty for cheating and peer dishonesty across three countries. In addition, cultural differences accounted for almost 50% of the explained variance in academic dishonesty with French students reportedly engaged in significantly more academic cheating behavior than Greek and U.S. students. Discussion and implications for business ethics teaching and research were discussed. (shrink)

Research has shown that cheating is perceived as immoral when it serves the cheater’s interests, though it can be seen as moral when it serves the interests of the perceiver. However, are such biased moral judgments real, or are they merely lip service? To answer the question of whether biased moral judgments actually inform behavior, the authors asked participants to observe a confederate who either cheated for money or did not cheat, which benefited either the confederate alone or both the (...) confederate and the participating observer. Then, participants evaluated the confederate and, finally, played a one shot trust game with her. Cheating influenced moral judgments and decreased behavioral trust, but this only occurred when self-interest was not involved. When self-interest was involved, participants showed no significant differences in trust levels, independent of whether the confederate had cheated or not. Implications for the dual process theory in moral psychology are discussed. (shrink)

The paper takes a look at insurance customer dishonesty as a special case of consumer ethics, understood as a way of situation handling, as a moral choice between right and wrong, such as between self-interest vs. common-interest, in other words, a “moral temptation”. After briefly raising the question if different schools, of moral philosophy would conceptualize such moral temptations differently, the paper presents ‘moral psychology’ as a frame of reference, with a focus on cognitive moral development, moral attitude and (...) moral neutralization. Conceptualization questions can’t be answered finally without thinking at the same time of empirical research design and instrument design decisions, e.g. choosing between experiment vs. questionnaire studies, designing suitable moral temptation situations as an experiment vs. questionnaires with scenario vignettes. The paper discusses then experiences from a 2004 pilot survey, with a main focus on a few insurance dishonesty scenarios with follow-up questions. The paper has an open end, i.e. outlines desirable future theoretical, empirical and practical work with insurance customer dishonesty. (shrink)

Although Kant is one of the very few classical writers referred to in the current literature on lying, hardly any attention is paid to how his views relate to the contemporary discussion on the definition of lying. I argue that, in Kant’s account, deception is not the defining feature of lying. Furthermore, his view is able to acknowledge non-deceptive lies. Kant thus holds, I suggest, a version of what is currently labelled Intrinsic Anti-Deceptionism. In his specific version of such a (...) view, furthermore, dishonesty is the distinctive feature of lying. Finally, I highlight the important methodological differences between Kant’s normatively minded account and the primarily descriptive contemporary discussion, with regard to the role of intuitions and definitions in building a moral theory: In contrast to the current debate, Kant does not rely on intuitions, but defines lying in terms of the obligation it violates. (shrink)

Moral Seduction Theory suggests that auditors are morally compromised by the perceived consequences of their opinions. The root of the auditing problem appears to result in an unintentional bias rather than in dishonesty. Although important accounting reforms have been taken to deal with auditors' trustworthiness, their lack of independence has not been adequately addressed. The new regulation (Sarbanes-Oxley Act) is a consequence of an incorrect understanding of the main true source of auditor's biases. We have developed a cognitive approach (...) by connecting the Throughput Model (TM) to the Moral Seduction Theory. This approach allows a better understanding of how conflicts of interest lead auditors to avoid the issuance of warning signals to stakeholders. We have tested our model by conducting a hypothetical scenario with eighty experienced auditors from international accounting firms. Our results confirm auditors' unintentional reluctance to issue qualified audit opinions alerting investors due to their fear of precipitating clients' final bankruptcy. The main implication is that, more than a regulation, effort should be made in monitoring those conflicts of interest to reduce unintentional bias. (shrink)

This paper applies Beck and Ajzen’s (Journal of Research in Personality 25:285–301, 1991 ) extended version of the theory of planned behaviour model to the decisions of students to engage in academic dishonesty (cheating and lying). The model proposes that students’ intentions to engage in dysfunctional behaviours may be influenced by attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control and moral obligation. This study was done using a survey questionnaire of 363 undergraduate students at a West Indian University. Based on the (...) extended version of the theory of planned behaviour, with the exception of subjective norms which only predicted students’ intentions to cheat, it was found that attitudes, perceived behavioural control and moral obligation were significant predictors of students’ intentions to perform academic dishonesty behaviours in the form of cheating and lying. The results of the study have given further support to the use of the extended version of the theory of planned behaviour. Implications are discussed. (shrink)

With the increase in students taking online classes to complete their degrees, there is a corresponding increase of research into how students might participate in these online classes. One way in which students may participate, but subvert the parameters of the online class they are taking, is by engaging in academic dishonesty. Academic dishonesty can reduce the quality of the learning experience for students, and reduce the validity and trust in online class’s assessment. For this reason, understanding how (...) student perceive their cheating behavior is useful for researchers. This paper looks at the interview responses of a group of students taking cyber university classes to gain insight into their perceptions and motivations for cheating. The responses were varied, but showed the ad-hoc nature of the behavior and that students felt that academic dishonesty was a natural aspect of their learning experience. (shrink)

Little work has been done on beliefs toward academic misconduct in Ukraine. This study explored the beliefs of Ukrainian students toward various forms of academic misconduct and compared the results to the U.S. undergraduate students (N = 270). Twenty-two forms of cheating, plagiarism, and questionable academic behaviors were grouped in five categories: unilateral cheating, collective cheating, falsification gaining favoritism, and performing extra work to receive better grades. Cross-cultural comparisons of beliefs were pivotal in this study. Results indicated that, in general, (...) Ukrainian students are less likely to believe that academic misconduct is wrong compared to their U.S. counterparts, as well as seem to have different beliefs on what is and isn’t academic misconduct. Recommendations are proposed to help students change their beliefs and to reduce academic dishonesty. These recommendations also have application purposes outside of Ukraine. (shrink)

The relationship between greenwashing and visitors' green behavior remains an under-researched topic in the tourism and hospitality literature, despite evidence of the harmful effect of greenwashing on the reputation and competitive advantage of organizations. This study extends attribution theory into the green context to develop a research framework for investigating the interrelationship between greenwashing, green trust, and green word-of-mouth (WOM), especially the roles of green trust and connectedness to nature. We conducted a survey of 289 visitors staying in four- and (...) five-star hotels in Vietnam. The findings indicated that hotels should avoid greenwashing due to its negative impact on visitors' green trust and green WOM. Moreover, the study found that greenwashing had an indirect and negative influence on green WOM based on visitors' green trust. Importantly, the research revealed the value of connectedness in moderating green attitudes and behaviors among visitors. (shrink)

Monetary intelligence theory asserts that individuals apply their money attitude to frame critical concerns in the context and strategically select certain options to achieve financial goals and ultimate happiness. This study explores the dark side of monetary Intelligence and behavioral economics—dishonesty. Dishonesty, a risky prospect, involves cost–benefit analysis of self-interest. We frame good or bad barrels in the environmental context as a proxy of high or low probability of getting caught for dishonesty, respectively. We theorize: The magnitude (...) and intensity of the relationship between love of money and dishonest prospect may reveal how individuals frame dishonesty in the context of two levels of subjective norm—perceived corporate ethical values at the micro-level and Corruption Perceptions Index at the macro-level, collected from multiple sources. Based on 6382 managers in 31 geopolitical entities across six continents, our cross-level three-way interaction effect illustrates: As expected, managers in good barrels, mixed barrels, and bad barrels display low, medium, and high magnitude of dishonesty, respectively. With high CEV, the intensity is the same across cultures. With low CEV, the intensity of dishonesty is the highest in high CPI entities —the Enron Effect, but the lowest in low CPI entities. CPI has a strong impact on the magnitude of dishonesty, whereas CEV has a strong impact on the intensity of dishonesty. We demonstrate dishonesty in light of monetary values and two frames of social norm, revealing critical implications to the field of behavioral economics and business ethics. (shrink)