An investigation on Turkish EFL Majoring Students’ Unethical Behaviors

Barin, Muzaffer; Han, Turgay; Aybirdi, Nilüfer

doi:10.24106/kefdergi.3185

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second is to investigate the variables that best explain the academic dishonesty tendency levels of the students who continue their graduate education by using the CHAID (Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection) analysis method. When the literature is examined (Adıbatmaz & Kurnaz, 2017;Akbaşlı et al, 2019;Akdağ & Güneş, 2002;Ayoub/Al-Salim & Aladwan, 2021;Barın et al, 2018;Bateman & Valentine, 2010;Belet-Boyacı et al, 2017;Brown, Bourke-Taylor et al, 2019;Brown, Isbel et al, 2020;Burns, et al, 1998;Chow et al, 2021;Coate & Frey, 2000;Çenberci, 2018;Çetin, 2007;Dağaşan et al, 2017;Dam, 2013;Demir & Arcagök, 2013;Duran, 2020;Eminoğlu-Küçüktepe & Küçüktepe, 2012;Eriksson & McGee, 2015;Ersoy & Özden, 2011;Gümüşgül et al, 2013;Hadjar, 2019;Hensley et al, 2013;Kadı et al, 2016;Kaymakcan, 2002;Keçeci et al, 2011;Kıral & Saracaloğlu, 2018;Kocaman-Karoğlu & Bakar-Çörez, 2020;Koç, 2018;Korn & Davidovitch, 2016;Lin & Wen, 2007;McCabe & Trevino, 1997;Nonis & Swift, 1998;Novianti, 2022;Ömür et al, 2014;Öztürk-Başpınar & Çakıroğlu, 2019;Özyurt & Eren, 2014;…”

Section: Purpose Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, when students' frequency of cheating according to gender was examined in the literature, it was observed that females come to the fore in terms of rarely cheating and that males come to the fore in terms of cheating more frequently (Duran, 2020). In addition, there are studies not reporting significant differences between males and females in terms of their cheating tendencies (Ayoub/Al-Salim & Aladwan, 2021;Barın et al, 2018;Çenberci, 2018;Çetin, 2007;Dam, 2013;Keçeci et al, 2011;Lin & Wen, 2007;Novianti, 2022;Pearson, 2019;Szabo & Underwood, 2004;Tümkaya, 2019;Ünlü & Eroğlu, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometric Properties of Academic Dishonesty Tendency Scale for Graduate Students and Investigating Academic Dishonesty Tendency Levels with CHAID Analysis

Özmercan

Polat

Nartgün

2022

Eğitimde Ve Psikolojide Ölçme Ve Değerlendirme Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of unethical academic dishonesty behaviours is increasing with each day in higher education. Thus, it is important to determine the level of the behaviour of academic dishonesty in the education system, the tendencies of students to perform this behaviour, and the individuals who have a tendency to show this behaviour in advance. The research has two different aims. The first one is to determine the psychometric properties of the Academic Dishonesty Tendency Scale (ADTS) originally developed for undergraduate students, not for graduate students. The second aim is to investigate the variables that best explain the academic dishonesty tendency levels of the students who continue their graduate education by using the CHAID analysis method. As a result of the analyses, it was determined that the Academic Dishonesty Tendency Scale is also a valid and reliable measurement tool for graduate students. The only significant variable explaining the students’ Tendency Towards Cheating was found to be the level of graduate education. It was also determined that the most important variable affecting the “dishonesty tendency at studies as homework, project, etc.–common” is the level of graduate education. The only significant variable explaining the “dishonesty tendency at research and process of write up” was found to be the reason for receiving graduate education. The most significant variable explaining the “dishonesty tendency towards reference” of the students was found to be the level of graduate education. It was determined that the most significant variable explaining the Academic Dishonesty Tendency of the students is the level of graduate education.

show abstract