Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Factors of Academic Misconduct in a Cross-Cultural Perspective and the Role of Integrity Systems

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, the main factors of academic cheating and plagiarism in four countries (Russia, US, Poland, and Latvia) are analyzed. Three groups of factors are investigated, namely individual, motivational, and contextual. A mixed method approach has been used, with material including student surveys, interviews with university teachers and administrators, and analysis of university documents. The survey results show that the role of individual social-demographic factors are not significant for predicting misconduct. Students are prone to neutralize their own blame in misconduct, and refer to the external conditions by the proposition that it is difficult to avoid cheating and plagiarism during university studies. Students are also more likely to cheat and plagiarize in the conditions of weak teachers’ control and deterrents. Such results demonstrate the importance of an integrity policy at the national, institutional and classroom levels, and that the social and cultural environment can be important factors in cheating. Integrity systems and the level, which they have been implemented, have a significant impact on student misconduct and attitudes toward cheating.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For measuring teachers’ control and neutralizing attitudes, we asked specific questions about cheating on exams and plagiarism. For example, we asked students two separate questions about teachers’ control on exams: 1) Do teachers/faculty usually control or prevent student misconduct during the test or exam? 2) Do teachers/faculty usually check students’ papers for plagiarism?

  2. Ustawa z dnia 27 lipca 2005 r. Prawo o szkolnictwie wyższym. Dz.U. 2005 Nr 164 poz. 1365. Rozd. 4,6.; Rozporządzenie Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego z dnia 6 grudnia 2006 r. w sprawie szczegółowego trybu postępowania wyjaśniającego i dyscyplinarnego wobec studentów http://dziennikustaw.gov.pl/du/2006/s/236/1707

  3. https://corp.antiplagiat.ru/docs

  4. As well as in the previous case, we use the linear regression for measuring factors of cheating on exam, and binary logistic regression for measuring factors of plagiarism.

References

  • Anderman, E. M. (2007). In E. M. Anderman & T. B. Murdock (Eds.), Psychology of academic cheating. Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier Academic Press.

  • Antion, D. L., & Michael, W. B. (1983). Short-term predictive validity of demographic, affective, personal, and cognitive variables in relation to two criterion measures of cheating behaviors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(2), 467–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolin, A. U. (2004). Self-control, perceived opportunity, and attitudes as predictors of academic dishonesty. The Journal of Psychology, 138(2), 101–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowers, W. J. (1964). Student dishonesty and its control in college. New York: Bureau of Applied Social Research, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. S., & Emmett, D. (2001). Explaining variations in the level of academic dishonesty in studies of college students: Some new evidence. College Student Journal, 35(4), 529–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. S., Weible, R. J., & Olmosk, K. E. (2010). Business school deans on student academic dishonesty: A survey. College Student Journal, 44(2), 299–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burrus, R.t. T., McGoldrick, K. M., & Schuhmann, P. W. (2007). Self-reports of student cheating: Does a definition of cheating matter? The Journal of Economic Education, 48(1), 3–16.

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publications.

  • De Bruin, G. P., & Rudnick, H. (2007). Examining the cheats: The role of conscientiousness and excitement seeking in academic dishonesty. South Africa Journal of Psychology, 37(1), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E., Clark, R. E., Williams, L. E., Francis, B., & Haines, V. J. (1996). College cheating: Ten years later. Research in Higher Education, 37, 487–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckstein, M. A. (2003). Combating academic fraud towards the culture of integrity. Paris: IIEP. UNESC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elias, R. Z. (2009). The impact of anti-intellectualism attitudes and academic self-efficacy on business students’ perceptions of cheating. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2), 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foltýnek, T., & Surovec, M. (2015). Promoting Academic Integrity Helps National Economy. In Conference Proceedings. 1. vyd. Brno (pp. 121–133). MENDELU Publishing Centre.

  • Gallant, T. B. (2008). Academic integrity in the twenty-first century: A teaching and learning imperative. ASHE Higher Education Report, 33(5), 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallant, T. B., & Drinan, P. (2006). Organizational theory and student cheating: Explanation, responses, and strategies. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 839–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, I. (2013). Comparison of policies for academic integrity in higher education across the European Union. IPPHEAE project consortium. Retrieved September, 8, 2016 (http://plagiarism.cz/ippheae/files/D2-3-00%20EU%20IPPHEAE%20CU%20Survey%20EU-wide%20report.pdf) Accessed 25.12.2017.

  • Grimes, P. W. (2004). Dishonesty in academics and business: A cross-cultural evaluation of student attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross, E. R. (2011). Clashing values: Contemporary views about cheating and plagiarism compared to traditional beliefs and practices. Education, 132(2), 435–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, T. S., Mayhew, M. J., Finelli, C. J., & and Carpenter, D. (2007). The theory of planned behavior as a model of academic dishonesty in humanities and engineering undergraduates. Ethics and Behavior, 17 (4), 255–279.

  • Jones, D. L. R. (2011). Academic dishonesty: Are more students cheating? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 141–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karklins, R. (2005). The system made me do it: Corruption in post-communist societies. Armonk: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kibler, W. L. (1993). Academic dishonesty: A student development dilemma. NASPA Journal, 30(4), 252–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • LaBeff, E. E., Clark, R. E., Haines, V. J., & Diekhoff, G. M. (1990). Situational ethics and college student cheating. Sociological Inquiry, 60(2), 190–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lang, J. M. (2013). Cheating lessons: Learning from academic dishonesty. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Löfström, E., & Kupila, P. (2013). The instructional challenges of student plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11, 231–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., &. Treviño, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. The Journal of Higher Education 68(5), 520–538.

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (1999). Academic integrity in honor code and non-honor code environments: A qualitative investigation. The Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), 211–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes and proposed action. The Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5(3), 294–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2012). Cheating in college: Why students do it and what educators can do about it. Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Miller, W. L., Grødeland, Å. B., & Koshechkina, T. Y. (2001). A culture of corruption? Coping with government in post-communist Europe, Budapest & New York: Central European. University Press.

  • Pavela, G. (1997). Applying the power of association on campus: A model code of academic integrity. Journal of College and University Law, 24(1), 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulvers, K., & Diekhoff, G. M. (1999). The relationship between academic dishonesty and college classroom environment. Research in Higher Education, 40(4), 487–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qwunwanne, D., Rustagi, N., & Dada, R. (2010). Students’ perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in higher institutions. Journal Of College Teaching And Learning, 7(11), 59–68.

  • Rothstein, B. (2011). Anti-corruption: The indirect ‘big-bang’ approach. Review of International Political Economy, 18(2), 228–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shils, E. A. (1984). The academic ethic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, M. L., & James, R. D. (2004). Perceptions of dishonesty among two-year college students: Academic versus business situations. Journal of Business Ethics, 51(1), 62–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spear, J. A., & Miller, N. (2012). The effects of instructor fear appeals and moral appeals on cheating-related attitudes and behavior of university students. Ethics & Behavior, 22(3), 196–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urquhart, C., Lehmann, H., & Myers, M. D. (2010). Putting the ‘theory’ back into grounded theory: Guidelines for grounded theory studies in information systems. Info Systems Journal, 20, 357–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vandehey, M. A., Diekhoff, G. M., & LaBeff, E. E. (2007). College cheating: A twenty-year follow-up and the addition of an honor code. Journal of College Student Development, 48(4), 468–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41(1), 19–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, T., Chesnut, S., Barnard-Brak, L., & Schmidt, M. (2014). University Students' perceptions of academic cheating: Triangulating quantitative and qualitative findings. Journal of Academic Ethics, 12(4), 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39, 235–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E. Jr, Nelson, A. B., & Jones, C.J. (1999). Gender differences in cheating attitudes and classroom cheating behavior: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles; Nov; 41 (9/10), 657–680.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the following individuals for their help and support: Professor Krzysztof Kosela, Professor Maredith Redlin, Katarzyna Uklańska, Ewa Antoniak, Jurijs Ņikišins, Konstantin Obukhov for their support and assistance in the research; Dr. Jennifer Ast for editing the paper; Professor Leonid Polishchuk for valuable discussions in research. The initiative was supported through following grants: Fulbright Visiting Scholar Program (Russia); ERAMUNDUS-EMA2; The Centre for Polish-Russian Dialogue and Understanding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Institute of History and Sociology, Udmurt State University, 255-200, Udmurtskaya street, 426000, Izhevsk, Russia

    Marina Makarova

Authors
  1. Marina Makarova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marina Makarova.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Makarova, M. Factors of Academic Misconduct in a Cross-Cultural Perspective and the Role of Integrity Systems. J Acad Ethics 17, 51–71 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-9323-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-9323-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation