Narrow facets of honesty-humility predict collegiate cheating

Rensburg, Yolandi-Eloise Janse van; Köck, F.; Derous, Eva

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.006

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given this, it is unsurprising that the major motivators for academic dishonesty are suggested to be the desire to get ahead and achieve at all costs, while students who do not cheat are constrained by a personal moral anchor such as a belief that cheating is unacceptable (Simkin & McLeod, 2010). Most recently, research has highlighted links between academic dishonesty and honesty/humility, a trait claimed to specifically reflect unethical aspects of behaviour (van Rensburg, Kock, & Derous, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What motivates academic dishonesty in students? A reinforcement sensitivity theory explanation

Bacon

McDaid

Williams

et al. 2019

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Academic dishonesty (AD) is an increasing challenge for universities worldwide. The rise of the Internet has further increased opportunities for students to cheat. Aims In this study, we investigate the role of personality traits defined within Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) as potential determinants of AD. RST defines behaviour as resulting from approach (Reward Interest/reactivity, goal‐drive, and Impulsivity) and avoidance (behavioural inhibition and Fight–Flight–Freeze) motivations. We further consider the role of deep, surface, or achieving study motivations in mediating/moderating the relationship between personality and AD. Sample A sample of UK undergraduates (N = 240). Method All participants completed the RST Personality Questionnaire, a short‐form version of the study process questionnaire and a measure of engagement in AD, its perceived prevalence, and seriousness. Results Results showed that RST traits account for additional variance in AD. Mediation analysis suggested that GDP predicted dishonesty indirectly via a surface study approach while the indirect effect via deep study processes suggested dishonesty was not likely. Likelihood of engagement in AD was positively associated with personality traits reflecting Impulsivity and Fight–Flight–Freeze behaviours. Surface study motivation moderated the Impulsivity effect and achieving motivation the FFFS effect such that cheating was even more likely when high levels of these processes were used. Conclusions The findings suggest that motivational personality traits defined within RST can explain variance in the likelihood of engaging in dishonest academic behaviours.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

What motivates academic dishonesty in students? A reinforcement sensitivity theory explanation

Bacon

McDaid

Williams

et al. 2019

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, De Vries et al observed a strong negative relation between H–H and CSB ( r = −.40). More recently, Van Rensburg, De Kock, and Derous (2018) replicated the negative relationship observed between H–H and CSB ( r = −.25) among a sample of South African students, although the magnitude of the relation observed was somewhat smaller than those reported by De Vries et al (2011).…”

Section: The Hexaco Model In Applied Contextsmentioning

confidence: 54%

“…McAbee et al (2014) reported a similar finding, where H–H was positively related to a single-item behavioral frequency measure of ethics and integrity ( r = .22), broadly defined by a lack of cheating on assignments and exams. Unlike Van Rensburg et al (2018), however, the H–H facet of Fairness demonstrated the strongest relationship with ethics and integrity ( r = .22).…”

Section: The Hexaco Model In Applied Contextsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Similar evidence comes from research examining relations between the HEXACO and cheating behavior (e.g., Hilbig & Zettler, 2015; Kleinlogel, Dietz, & Antonakis, 2018). For example, Van Rensburg et al (2018) observed a small, negative association between H–H and collegiate cheating ( r = −.11), which appeared to primarily be driven by the Greed Avoidance facet of this trait ( r = −.15). McAbee et al (2014) reported a similar finding, where H–H was positively related to a single-item behavioral frequency measure of ethics and integrity ( r = .22), broadly defined by a lack of cheating on assignments and exams.…”

Section: The Hexaco Model In Applied Contextsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The HEXACO Model in Education and Work

McAbee

Casillas

Way

et al. 2019

Zeitschrift für Psychologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Researchers have long been interested in examining relationships between personality traits and performance in applied settings. Although the Big Five remains the most prevalent model of personality, studies adopting an alternative personality model known as the HEXACO model have been increasing in the past decade (e.g., Ashton et al., 2004 ; Lee & Ashton, 2004 ). The aims of the present paper are three-fold: First, we systematically review the literature on the HEXACO model and its applications in educational and work settings. Second, we introduce an emerging applied personality framework for use in educational research and practice, the ACT Behavioral Skills Framework ( Casillas, Way, & Burrus, 2015 ), which is based on the HEXACO model. Third, we offer a number of suggestions for how future research can continue to refine the development and application of the HEXACO model in educational and organizational research and practice.

show abstract

“…Moreover, personality traits such as students’ honesty, bravery, and empathy were found to be negatively related to self‐reported instances of cheating in the past 12 months and to future intention to cheat in the next thirty days (Staats, Hupp, Wallace, & Gresley, 2009). Exploring the association between honesty and cheating (Kleinlogel, Dietz, & Antonakis, 2018; van Rensburg, de Kock, & Derous, 2018) has the potential to deepen our understanding of the dependency of cheating on personality factors. Honesty as a personality trait has been shown to be distinct from the five‐factor model (Ashton & Lee, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating how autonomy‐supportive teaching moderates the relation between student honesty and premeditated cheating

Bureau

Gareau

Guay

et al. 2021

Brit J of Edu Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Cheating at the post-secondary level is a skewed phenomenon. While personality and environmental factors are associated with cheating, few studies account for the zero inflation when predicting cheating behaviour.Aim. In this study, we explore a person-situation interaction hypothesis where teacher autonomy support (AS) could modify the relation between students' honesty trait and premeditated cheating.Sample. Participants were 710 college students and 31 teachers.Methods. Teacher and student reports of teacher AS were collected and students also completed self-reports of honesty and premeditated cheating.Results. Given that cheating had a zero-inflated negative binomial distribution, we can investigate two separate outcomes: likelihood of cheating and magnitude of cheating. Predictably, student honesty trait predicted lower likelihood and magnitude of cheating. AS, whether student-or teacher-reported, moderated the relation between honesty and likelihood of cheating. In low perceived AS teaching environments, student honesty was associated with cheating likelihood. However, there was no such relation in high perceived AS teaching environments.Conclusions. Students' honesty generally predicts lower cheating. However, the educational environment provided by the teacher influences the strength of this association. The less autonomy-supportive students perceive the educational environment, the more their personality is important in predicting the likelihood of cheating.

show abstract

Narrow facets of honesty-humility predict collegiate cheating

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

What motivates academic dishonesty in students? A reinforcement sensitivity theory explanation

What motivates academic dishonesty in students? A reinforcement sensitivity theory explanation

The HEXACO Model in Education and Work

Investigating how autonomy‐supportive teaching moderates the relation between student honesty and premeditated cheating

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About