Integrated Moral Conviction Theory of Student Cheating: An Empirical Test

Roberts, Foster; Thomas, Christopher H.; Novičević, Milorad M.; Ammeter, Anthony P.; Garner, Bart; Johnson, Paul D.; Popoola, Ifeoluwa Tobi

doi:10.1177/1052562917710686

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 107 publications

(160 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…H4: As depicted in Figure 1 , and consistent with previous research (Hunt and Vitell, 2006 ; Detert et al, 2008 ; Roberts et al, 2017 ), moral judgment was expected to have both direct and indirect associations with academic dishonesty. Specifically, moral judgment was hypothesized to have a direct negative relationship with academic dishonesty as well as indirect associations through both responsibility judgment and moral disengagement.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Toward this end, numerous theories of ethical decision-making and moral functioning have been proffered (e.g., Sykes and Matza, 1957 ; Festinger, 1962 ; Fishbein and Ajzen, 1972 ; Blasi, 1980 , 1983 , 1984 ; Kohlberg and Candee, 1984 ; Bandura, 1986 ; Rest, 1986 ; Beck and Ajzen, 1991 ; Weiner, 1995 ; Rest et al, 1999 ; Bergman, 2002 ; Roberts et al, 2017 ). Albeit operationalized with different constructs, motivation and self-regulation are central to all theories in explaining or bridging the gap between moral cognition and action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bridging the Divide: The Role of Motivation and Self-Regulation in Explaining the Judgment-Action Gap Related to Academic Dishonesty

Thomas

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is often a divide between moral judgment and moral action; between what we believe we ought to do (or not do) and what we do. Knowledge of this divide is not new, and numerous theories have attempted to offer more robust accounts of ethical decision-making and moral functioning. Knowledge of widespread academic dishonesty among students is also not new, and several studies have revealed that many students report cheating despite believing it is wrong. The present study, involving cross-sectional survey data from a sample of secondary students (N = 380) in the United States, contributes to the literature on this important area of theory and research by fulfilling three broad purposes. The first purpose concerned the assessment of students' judgments related to academic dishonesty, and offered evidence for the utility of a new instrument that measures what domain (personal, conventional, or moral) students use to categorize various types of cheating behavior rather than how much they believe it to be wrong. The second purpose involved exploring the relations between domain judgments and engagement in academic dishonesty, and results provided evidence for the hypothesis that students who believed an action to be morally wrong would be less likely to report doing it. Finally, the third and most important purpose of the study involved bridging the divide between moral judgment and action of academic dishonesty by testing competing theoretical models of moral functioning. Results indicated that the data demonstrated the best fit to a modified version of the hypothesized four-component model, whereby self-regulation (in the form of selective moral disengagement) played a significant mediating role in the relations between moral judgment and academic dishonesty, and that moral judgment also affected self-regulation indirectly through moral motivation (i.e., responsibility judgments). In brief, findings from this study offer support for the contention that moral functioning is both multi-component and effortful. Moral judgment is important, but only one of several components needed for effective moral functioning, and motivation and self-regulation play critical mediating roles in helping to bridge the divide between judgment and action.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging the Divide: The Role of Motivation and Self-Regulation in Explaining the Judgment-Action Gap Related to Academic Dishonesty

Thomas

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This conclusion encourages universities to make efforts to improve students' moral honesty. The study Roberts, Thomas, Novicevic, Ammeter, Garner, Johnson, & Popoola (2018) found that moral beliefs predict students' moral disengagement and subsequent unethical decision making related to academic dishonesty not only directly but also indirectly through the philosophy of ethics and moral identity of students. By being honest, learning outcomes can be better.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

The Role of Consideration of the Value of Risks, Shame and Guilt in Utilitarian Moral Judgment on Academic Dishonesty Behavior

Hamzah¹,

Santoso²,

Imaduddin

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Students generally know that cheating and plagiarism are violations of academic ethics, but some still do it. The study of academic dishonesty has been more into quantitative approaches, thus it cannot explain the dynamics of moral psychology about the decision making of cheating and plagiarism. This study explores the role of the consideration of the value of risk, shame, and guilt in utilitarian moral judgment in academic dishonesty behavior, as a solution to the views of theoretical debates about the role of emotions and cognitive morals in explaining good and bad behavior. This research used an interpretative phenomenological analysis approach to explore the meaning of the experience of conducting academic dishonesty by interviewing 66 college students. The results showed that ignorance of shame and the absence of guilt played a role in weakening the utilitarian moral judgment of students to act honestly in the face of examinations and assignments. These findings contributed to the importance of strengthening moral and ethical education for students in academic programs.

show abstract

“…Researchers in psychology distinguish between clinical narcissism (a personality disorder) and trait narcissism. Trait narcissism is viewed as a relatively stable personality characteristic that is normally distributed in the adult population [38], [39]. In interpersonal contexts, trait narcissism serves as both a personality trait and as a self-regulatory mechanism, wherein the narcissist's motivations, relationships with others, and self-regulatory strategies interact to drive behavior [39].…”

Section: Students' Moral Development Affects Students' Academic Fraud Behaviormentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship between accounting students’ moral development and narcissism on academic fraud

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The stages in an individual's moral development will determine how an individual will behave. Kohlberg divides moral development into three stages, namely pre-conventional, conventional and post-conventional. However, the stages of individual moral development may vary. These different levels of moral development will influence individuals’ behavior when they face ethical dilemmas. This research aimed to determine the correlation between accounting students’ moral development and narcissism on academic fraud. This quantitative research employed a survey method. The research samples were 46 accounting students taken with a random sampling method. The results showed that narcissism affects accounting students’ academic fraud but there is no correlation between the level of moral development and academic fraud.

show abstract

Integrated Moral Conviction Theory of Student Cheating: An Empirical Test

Cited by 6 publications

References 107 publications

Bridging the Divide: The Role of Motivation and Self-Regulation in Explaining the Judgment-Action Gap Related to Academic Dishonesty

Bridging the Divide: The Role of Motivation and Self-Regulation in Explaining the Judgment-Action Gap Related to Academic Dishonesty

The Role of Consideration of the Value of Risks, Shame and Guilt in Utilitarian Moral Judgment on Academic Dishonesty Behavior

The relationship between accounting students’ moral development and narcissism on academic fraud

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About