“…The forward and blind back-translations of the instrument revealed no discrepancies in the meaning of the items; however, six students asked for clarification of some items concerning specific examples of behaviour, the actors' ageing behaviour or experiences not included in the items. 42 Items 2,7,9,15,16,21,22,23,25,27,29,31,37,41,42,46,47,48,50 In the final step, the expert panel evaluated the instrument for semantic, cultural, linguistic and conceptual equivalence using the CVI, and we retained items with CVI �0.90 48 was item 1 (identify plagiarism by a student) (Table 3).…”