Volume 11, Issue 7 (July 2024), Pages: 69-74

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Study of academic dishonesty among students at a tertiary university: Forms, prevalence, and associated factors

 Author(s): 

 Emmanuel Joy T. Cleto *

 Affiliation(s):

 Laboratory High School, NEUST General Tinio Campus, Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, Cabanatuan, Philippines

 Full text

  Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0923-4315

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.07.009

 Abstract

The purpose of this research was to analyze the prevalence of academic dishonesty among college students at a university and to investigate the different forms it can take and how common these behaviors are. Additionally, the study aimed to identify the factors related to academic dishonesty. The participants were undergraduates studying various subjects at the university. Data was collected through questionnaires and interviews to gather both quantitative and qualitative information about experiences with academic dishonesty. The findings highlighted the common types of academic dishonesty among college students and revealed how often these activities occur. The research also identified potential factors contributing to academic dishonesty, such as peer influence, perceived academic pressure, and a lack of proper instruction in ethical principles. These findings enhance our understanding of academic dishonesty among college students and provide educational institutions and policymakers with valuable insights to develop effective strategies and interventions to address this issue and promote academic integrity.

 © 2024 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Academic dishonesty, College students, Prevalence, Contributing factors, Academic integrity

 Article history

 Received 16 January 2024, Received in revised form 23 June 2024, Accepted 1 July 2024

 Acknowledgment 

No Acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and their confidentiality and anonymity were maintained throughout the research process. 

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Cleto EJT (2024). Study of academic dishonesty among students at a tertiary university: Forms, prevalence, and associated factors. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 11(7): 69-74

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1

----------------------------------------------   

 References (19)

1. Abusafia AH, Roslan NS, Yusoff DM, and Nor MZM (2018). Snapshot of academic dishonesty among Malaysian nursing students: A single university experience. Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 13(4): 370-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2018.04.003   [Google Scholar] PMid:31435349 PMCid:PMC6695030
2. Alajami A (2021). Promoting ethical behavior and how junior investigators perceive academic integrity: Critical approach. Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 2: 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100027   [Google Scholar]
3. Bin-Nashwan SA, Sadallah M, and Bouteraa M (2023). Use of ChatGPT in academia: Academic integrity hangs in the balance. Technology in Society, 75: 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102370   [Google Scholar]
4. Cerda-Navarro A, Touza C, Morey-López M, and Curiel E (2022). Academic integrity policies against assessment fraud in postgraduate studies: An analysis of the situation in Spanish universities. Heliyon, 8: e09170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09170   [Google Scholar] PMid:35846466 PMCid:PMC9280494
5. Clemmons A, Lebovitz L, Fulford M, Greene K, Franks A, Branan T, and Plake KI (2022). Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faculty at research-intensive United States schools/colleges of pharmacy. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 14(2): 145-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2021.11.018   [Google Scholar] PMid:35190155 PMCid:PMC8711793
6. Comas-Forgas R, Lancaster T, Calvo-Sastre A, and Sureda-Negre J (2021). Exam cheating and academic integrity breaches during the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of internet search activity in Spain. Heliyon, 7: e08233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08233   [Google Scholar] PMid:34722942 PMCid:PMC8539823
7. Dendir S and Maxwell RS (2020). Cheating in online courses: Evidence from online proctoring. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 2: 100033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100033   [Google Scholar]
8. Elsalem L, Al-Azzam N, Jum'ah AA, and Obeidat N (2021). Remote e-exams during COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study of students’ preferences and academic dishonesty in faculties of medical sciences. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 62: 326-333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2021.01.054   [Google Scholar] PMid:33520225 PMCid:PMC7825891
9. Eshet Y, Dickman N, and Zion YB (2023). Academic integrity in the HyFlex learning environment. Heliyon, 9: e13301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13301   [Google Scholar] PMid:36798777 PMCid:PMC9925967
10. Henderson M, Ajjawi R, Boud D, and Molloy E (2020). The impact of feedback in higher education: Improving assessment outcomes for learners. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25112-3   [Google Scholar]
11. Hernandez MD (2023). An application of rule-based classification with fuzzy logic to image subtraction. International Journal of Engineering and Manufacturing, 13(2): 22-31. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijem.2023.02.03   [Google Scholar]
12. Humbert M, Lambin X, and Villard E (2022). The role of prior warnings when cheating is easy and punishment is credible. Information Economics and Policy, 58: 100959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2021.100959   [Google Scholar] PMCid:PMC9754663
13. Iberahim H, Hussein N, Samat N, Noordin F, and Daud N (2013). Academic dishonesty: Why business students participate in these practices? Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90: 152-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.076   [Google Scholar]
14. Küçüktepe SE (2010). A study on preservice English teachers’ self-efficacy perceptions and tendency towards academic dishonesty. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2): 4985-4990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.807   [Google Scholar]
15. Küçüktepe SE (2011). Evaluation of tendency towards academic dishonesty levels of psychological counseling and guidance undergraduate students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15: 2722-2727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.177   [Google Scholar]
16. Rahman RA, Masrom S, Mohamad M, Sari EN, Saragih F, and Abd Rahman AS (2023). Comparisons of automated machine learning (AutoML) in predicting whistleblowing of academic dishonesty with demographic and theory of planned behavior. MethodsX, 11: 102364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2023.102364   [Google Scholar] PMid:37744883 PMCid:PMC10511801
17. Yee S, Xu A, Batool K, Duan TY, Cameron CA, and Lee K (2024). Academic cheating in early childhood: Role of age, gender, personality, and self-efficacy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 242: 105888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2024.105888   [Google Scholar] PMid:38430869
18. Zhao L, Mao H, Compton BJ, Peng J, Fu G, Fang F, Heyman GD, and Lee K (2022a). Academic dishonesty and its relations to peer cheating and culture: A meta-analysis of the perceived peer cheating effect. Educational Research Review, 36: 100455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100455   [Google Scholar]
19. Zhao L, Peng J, Dong LD, Li Y, Mao H, Compton BJ, Ye J, Li G, Heyman GD, and Lee K (2022b). Dataset of the effect of difficulty messaging on academic cheating in middle school Chinese children. Data in Brief, 43: 108405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2022.108405   [Google Scholar] PMid:35781984 PMCid:PMC9241090