Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychology Graduate Students Weigh In: Qualitative Analysis of Academic Dishonesty and Suggestion Prevention Strategies

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

Abstract

The current qualitative study investigated prevalence and types of academic integrity violations in psychology graduate students (N = 201) and solicited student recommendations for how academic institutions, professors, and peers may act to discourage or prevent its occurrence. Students were recruited through email lists and asked to participate in an online study with a series of open-ended questions assessing integrity violations and prevention recommendations. Results revealed academic integrity violations were relatively infrequent (8 % of the sample) and most (75 % of reported incidents) were of relatively low severity (e.g., unauthorized use of notes during an assignment). Common antecedents to integrity violations included inadequate preparation, task difficulty, and external stressors such as health ailments that interfered with preparation. Most (53 %) violators reported engaging in a rational decision making process, weighing the pros and cons of cheating, and most (60 %) did not reveal the violation to anyone. The majority of violations (81 %) resulted in no negative consequences to the student and 44 % reported they would do it again. Students recommended better dissemination of integrity policies, greater oversight of graduate students, harsher punishments for violations, and consistent reporting of violations as prevention strategies. Results highlight how academic dishonesty in psychology graduate students may be a product of multiple time and resource demands, coupled with low self-efficacy to meet or negotiate these demands. Despite reports of external pressures being the top reason for academic integrity violations, few recommendations focused on decreasing external pressures as a mechanism to curb 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

References

  • American Psychological Association (2010). 2010 doctoral student demographics: Clinical and counseling psychology programs. http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/about/research/clinical-counseling-table.pdf.

  • Anderson, R. E., & Obenstain, S. (1994). Cheating by student: Finding, reflections, and remedies. Academic Medicine, 69, 323–332. doi:10.1097/0000188-199405000-00002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird, J. S., Jr. (1980). Current trends in college cheating. Psychology in the Schools, 17, 515–522. doi:10.1002/1520-6807(198010)17:4<515::AID-PITS2310170417>3.0.CO;2-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. B. (1995). The academic ethics of graduate business students. A survey. Journal of Education for Business, 70(3), 151–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunell, A. B., Staats, S., Barden, J., & Hupp, J. M. (2011). Narcissism and academic dishonesty: The exhibitionism dimension and lack of guilt. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 323–328. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Center for Academic Integrity (2005). CAI Research. http://www.waunakee.k12.wi.us/hs/departments/lmtc/Assignments/McConnellScenarios/AcadHonesty_5Article.pdf. Accessed 1 Sept 2013

  • Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H., & McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 16–20. doi:10.1207/s15328023top1901_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, R. (2004). Attributes and statuses of college students associated with classroom cheating on a small-sized campus. College Student Journal, 38(1), 116–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeAndrea, D. C., Carpenter, C., Shulman, H., & Levine, T. R. (2009). The relationship between cheating behaviors and sensation-seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 944–947. doi:10.1016/j/paid.2009.07.021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fly, B. J., van Bark, W. P., Weinman, L., Kitchener, K. S., & Lang, P. R. (1997). Ethical transgressions of psychology graduate students: Critical incidents with implications for training. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 28(5), 492–495. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.28.5.492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Genereux, R. L., & McLeod, B. A. (1995). Circumstances surrounding cheating: A questionnaire study of college students. Research in Higher Education, 36, 687–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, M. A., Monday, J., O’Brien, K., & Steffen, S. (1994). Cheating at small colleges: An examination of student and faculty attitudes and behaviors. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 225–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpp, D. N., & Hogan, J. J. (1993). Crime in the classroom: Detection and prevention of cheating on multiple-choice exam. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 306–311. doi:10.1021/ed070p306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jendrek, M. P. (1989). Faculty reactions to academic dishonesty. Journal of College Student Development, 30(5), 401–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacker, H. Z. (2008). Life as a psychology graduate student. In A. C. Kracen & I. J. Wallace (Eds.), Applying to graduate school in psychology: Advice from successful students and prominent psychologists (pp. 33–54). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, L. A., Wozniak, K., & Laurel, J. P. (2003). Student reports and faculty perceptions academic dishonesty. Teaching Business Ethics, 7(3), 205–214. doi:10.1023/A:1025008818338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazar, N., Amir, O., & Ariely, D. (2008). The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45, 633–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L. (1992). The influence of situational ethics on cheating among college students. Sociological Inquiry, 62(3), 365–374. doi:10.1111/j.1475-82X.1992.tb00287.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L. (1993). Faculty responses to academic dishonesty: The influence of student honor codes. Research in Higher Education, 34, 647–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Bowers, W. J. (1994). Academic dishonesty among males in college: A thirty year perspective. Journal of College Student Development, 35(1), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. Journal of Higher Education, 64, 522–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 28, 379–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michalski, D. (2011). Pursuing a psychology career: Debt, financial support, starting salaries, and employment opportunities for tomorrow’s psychology leaders. Presentation given at the annual meeting of the Western Psychological Association, Los Angeles, CA.

  • Murdock, T. B., & Anderman, E. M. (2006). Motivational perspectives on student cheating: Toward an integrated model of academic dishonesty. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 129–145. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4103_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch, D., Baetz, M., & Hughes, J. C. (2005). Why code of conduct violations go unreported: A conceptual framework to guide intervention and future research. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 327–341. doi:10.1007/si 0551-004-8203-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penzel, W. R. (2000). Perceptions, attitudes, and rates of cheating in doctoral psychology and law students. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (99777089).

  • 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 

  • Quaye, B. R. L. (2010). Understanding contextual influences on undergraduate students’ decisions about academic cheating. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (3436095).

  • Rettinger, D. A., Jordan, A. E., & Perschiera, F. (2004). Evaluating the motivation of other students to cheat: A vignette experiment. Research in Higher Education, 45, 873–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocklin, T. (1996). Downloadable term papers: What’s a prof to do? The Newsletter of the Center for Teaching.http://cft.uiowa.edu/whats-prof-do.

  • Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods, 15(1), 85–109. doi:10.1177/1525822X02239569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, E. N. (2013). A study on graduate students: Perceptions of stress, job engagement, satisfaction, and buffering effects of social support and coping style. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (AAI3515274).

  • Singhal, A. C., & Johnson, P. (1983). How to halt student dishonesty. College Student Journal, 17(1), 13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solorzano, B. H. (2001). A qualitative analysis of psychologists’ ethical decision-making process involving peer impairment. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (3017002).

  • Stemler, S. (2004). A comparison of consistence, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(4). Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=4.

  • Sutton, A., & Taylor, D. (2011). Confusion about collusion: Working together and academic integrity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(7), 831–841. doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.488797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 235–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychological Science, University of Arkansas, 216 Memorial Hall, Fayetteville, AR, 72701, USA

    Jennifer Minarcik & Ana J. Bridges

Authors
  1. Jennifer Minarcik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ana J. Bridges
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana J. Bridges.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Minarcik, J., Bridges, A.J. Psychology Graduate Students Weigh In: Qualitative Analysis of Academic Dishonesty and Suggestion Prevention Strategies. J Acad Ethics 13, 197–216 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9230-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-015-9230-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation