Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students

Helen Marsden, Marie Carroll, James T. Neill

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

99 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-10
Number of pages10
JournalAustralian Journal of Psychology
Volume57
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2005

Fingerprint

Self Efficacy
Plagiarism
Self Report
Students
Demography
Regression Analysis
Learning

Cite this

@article{fa2a990004b74c96a8eb08cf7c2bfb69,
title = "Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students",
abstract = "The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.",
keywords = "cheating, university students, academic assessment, academic integrity",
author = "Helen Marsden and Marie Carroll and Neill, {James T.}",
year = "2005",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1080/00049530412331283426",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "1--10",
journal = "Australian Journal of Psychology",
issn = "0004-9530",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "1",

}

Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students. / Marsden, Helen; Carroll, Marie; Neill, James T.

In: Australian Journal of Psychology, Vol. 57, No. 1, 05.2005, p. 1-10.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students

AU - Marsden, Helen

AU - Carroll, Marie

AU - Neill, James T.

PY - 2005/5

Y1 - 2005/5

N2 - The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.

AB - The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.

KW - cheating

KW - university students

KW - academic assessment

KW - academic integrity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=22144437782&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00049530412331283426

DO - 10.1080/00049530412331283426

M3 - Review article

VL - 57

SP - 1

EP - 10

JO - Australian Journal of Psychology

JF - Australian Journal of Psychology

SN - 0004-9530

IS - 1

ER -