Examining Cross‐Cultural Differences in Academic Faking in 41 Nations

Abstract

This study examines cross‐cultural differences in students’ academic faking (indicated by claiming to have impossible knowledge about mathematical concepts) by relating data from the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) to the comprehensive cultural framework of the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) project. Data of N = 233,428 students from 41 countries showed a substantial amount of variance in academic faking between cultures. Students’ academic faking was positively related to the cultural dimensions of gender egalitarianism, humane orientation, and in‐group collectivism. Additionally, the similarity between female and male students’ academic faking was slightly greater in more gender‐egalitarian cultures than in less gender‐egalitarian cultures. Thus, educational stakeholders (e.g., teachers, principals, and policy‐makers) should be made aware of cross‐cultural differences in academic faking because faking gives fakers an unfair advantage.

Economic Predictors of Differences in Interview Faking Between Countries: Economic Inequality Matters, Not the State of Economy

“…Future research should include additional variables beyond economic predictors that were the focus of this study. In particular, previous research has suggested that cross‐country differences in faking correlates with three cultural dimensions of humane orientation, in‐group collectivism, and gender egalitarianism (Fell & König, 2016, 2020; Fell et al, 2016; see also Fell & König, 2020). Furthermore, future research should also study other kinds of ethically questionable behavior within the field of personnel selection (e.g., applicants unfairly using their influence and networks to get job interview invitations) and beyond and explore possible links to economic inequality.…”

Self-enhancement and cross-cultural adjustment: overclaiming in a global mobility context

“…When used in combination with personality inventories, overclaiming scores allow for filtering out error variance from personality scores that is due to faking (Bing et al , 2011). Cross-cultural differences in the extent of overclaiming do exist, as was found with an overclaiming test that asked respondents on their familiarity with nonexistent mathematical concepts (Fell and König, 2020; Fell et al , 2019; Vonkova et al , 2018). This is expected for overclaiming measures that do not take personal relevance of the tested knowledge domain into account.…”