Rationality and Students’ Misconduct at University: Empirical Evidence and Policy Implications

Abstract

We investigate the determinants of students’ misconduct at university. Using a sample of 310 surveyed students, we find that students are more likely to cheat when they have previous misconduct records, when they perceive academic integrity policy as being poorly enforced, and when they perceive that instructor tolerance toward misconduct incidents is high. Moreover, misconduct behavior tends to increase with students’ seniority and the perceived level of course difficulty. Surprisingly, students’ motivations toward reading, writing, and learning do not seem to have a valuable impact on the likelihood of their misconduct. Our findings have important policy implications that relate to the university culture of academic integrity, instructors’ tolerance vis-à-vis students’ misconduct behavior, and the effectiveness of punitive actions.

Exam cheating among Quebec’s preservice teachers: the influencing factors

“…Again, our results indicate no significant link between this factor and the propensity to cheat on exams. These results are in line with a recent study conducted by Grira and Jaeck ( 2019 ). Nor is there any correlation between the perception of control over tasks and the propensity to cheat, contrary to what other research studies are reporting (Rettinger and Kramer 2009 ).…”

“…In other words, if it is not part of what they need in their real work as teachers, students may be more likely to cheat. Although these studies concur in associating the likelihood of cheating with a lack of engagement, others report that “surprisingly, students’ motivations toward reading, writing, and learning do not seem to have a valuable impact on the likelihood of their misconduct” (Grira and Jaeck 2019 ).…”

Two Sides of the Coin: Lack of Academic Integrity in Exams During the Corona Pandemic, Students' and Lecturers' Perceptions

“…(e.g. Ahmed, 2018 ; Birks et al, 2020 ; Grira & Jaeck, 2019 ; Stearns, 2001 ). The literature also addresses lecturers' perceptions concerning students' academic dishonesty (e.g.…”

“…In contrast, academic dishonesty is defined as unethical behavior in an academic environment (Muhammad et al, 2020 ). This is inappropriate behavior whereby students act to gain an unfair academic advantage for themselves or for their friends in the academic community (Grira & Jaeck, 2019 ). Academic dishonesty prevents the development of positive values such as honesty, fairness and significant learning progress, and is connected to other negative behaviors, which have implications even beyond academia (Krou et al, 2020 ; Yu et al, 2018 ), such as in the work market in which inappropriately-skilled graduates may be employed (Barbaranelli et al, 2018 ; Bashir & Bala, 2018 ).…”

“…Research shows that such behavior is a known and prevalent phenomenon that has increased over recent years (e.g. Birks et al, 2020 ; Grira & Jaeck, 2019 ; Harper et al, 2020 ), and also that this is a multi-faceted cross-cultural global phenomenon (Barbaranelli et al, 2018 ; Bashir & Bala, 2018 ). For example, research in India found that slightly over 20% of 1,369 research participants admitted to academic dishonesty (Stearns, 2001 ).…”