Relation of gender, course enrollment, and grades to distinct forms of academic dishonesty

Hensley, Lauren; Kirkpatrick, Kathryn M.; Burgoon, Jennifer M.

doi:10.1080/13562517.2013.827641

Cited by 85 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Male respondents, more so than female respondents, appeared to adopt a relative opinion about academic honesty, reflecting the findings reported in other studies (Hensley et al 2013). However, male respondents, more so than female respondents, appeared to report less expedience with regard to expecting a qualification upon payment of fees and also expressed less awareness of the punishment for plagiarism.…”

Section: Discussion and Recommendationssupporting

confidence: 69%

“…Specifically, male millennial students evidence a higher incidence of academic dishonesty than female students depending on the form of academic dishonesty being considered (Hensley et al 2013). Men are more likely to plagiarise and make false excuses but no gender differences have been found when considering undifferentiated practices of academic dishonesty (Williams et al 2010).…”

Section: Reasons For Student Academic Dishonestymentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Cheating has been linked to students who evidence low grades (Hensley et al 2013), to those who lack self-confidence and have low self-esteem (Pittam et al 2009), to those who lack knowledge of how to avoid cheating (Granitz & Loewy 2007;Voelker et al 2012), and to those who are extrinsically motivated (Rettinger & Kramer 2009). Behaviour laziness or lack of conscientiousness (De Bruin & Rudnick 2007) and an inherent lack of integrity (Evering & Moorman 2012), have all been linked to student cheating.…”

Section: Reasons For Student Academic Dishonestymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Academic honesty: Perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables

Zyl

Thomas

2015

KOERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussion and Recommendationssupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Reasons For Student Academic Dishonestymentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Reasons For Student Academic Dishonestymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Academic honesty: Perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables

Zyl

Thomas

2015

KOERS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Porém, nada é conhecido sobre a adequação da estrutura trifatorial (realização perfeita, medo de castigo e inibição moral) proposta por Paulhus et al (2004), menos ainda sobre a consistência interna desses fatores. Não obstante, isso não impediu que essa medida fosse empregada para avaliar a trapaça acadêmica de uma forma geral e conhecer os seus correlatos (Hensley, Kirkpatrick, & Burgoon, 2013;Johnson, 2015;Williams, 2007).…”

Section: Escala De Autorrelato De Trapaça-admissão (Eat-a)unclassified

Escala de Autorrelato de Trapaça-Admissão: Evidências de Validade Fatorial e Precisão

Gouveia

Moura

Santos

et al. 2018

Rev. colomb. psicol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excepto que se establezca de otra forma, el contenido de esta revista cuenta con una licencia Creative Commons "reconocimiento, no comercial y sin obras derivadas" Colombia 2.5, que puede consultarse en: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/co Cheating Admission Self Report Scale: Evidence of Factorial Validity and Precision AbstractThis study aimed to adapt the Cheating Admission Self Report Scale (CaSRS) to the Brazilian context and collect evidence on factorial validity and internal consistency. 441 students participated (m=16 years, 54.6% females), randomly divided in two groups. All responded to CaSRS and to demographic questions. The analysis of the main components demonstrated a bifactor structure, whose factors presented Cronbach's alphas (α) greater than .80 (g 1 ). This structure was corroborated by means of confirmatory factor analysis (for example, CFi =.87 and RMSEa =.08). The scale was shown to be psychometrically adequate and there was evidence of factorial validity and internal consistency; the scale can be used to measure plagiarism in the academic context.Keywords: admission, plagiarism, precision, validity. Escala de Autoinforme de Trampa-Admisión: Evidencias de Validez Factorial y PrecisiónResumen El estudio tuvo como fin adaptar al contexto brasileño la Escala de Autoinforme de Trampa-Admisión (EaT-a), reuniendo evidencias de su validez factorial y consistencia interna. Participaron 441 estudiantes (m=16 años, 54.6% del sexo femenino), divididos al azar en dos grupos. Todos respondieron a EaT-a y a preguntas demográficas. El análisis de componentes principales evidenció una estructura bifactorial, cuyos factores presentaron alfas de Cronbach (α) superiores a .80 (g 1 ). Esta estructura fue corroborada por medio de análisis factorial confirmatorio (por ejemplo, CFi=.87 y RMSEa=.08). Se concluyó que esta escala se mostró psicométricamente adecuada y reunió evidencias de validez factorial y consistencia interna, y puede utilizarse para mensurar plagio en contexto académico.Palabras clave: admisión, plagio, precisión, validez.

show abstract

“…Also, Hensley, Kirkpatrick & Burgoon (2013) in a study on relation of gender, course enrolment and grades to distinct forms of academic dishonesty among undergraduate students in USA, used a 16-item scale adapted from Paulhus, Williams and Nathanson (2004). The 16-item measure entitled academic dishonesty scale yielded Cronbach's alpha 0.77 for cheating on tests, 0.77 for plagiarism and 0.70 for false excuses.…”

Section: International Journal Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Validation of Academic Dishonesty Scale (ADS): Presenting a Multidimensional Scale

Bashir¹,

Bala²

2018

INT J INSTRUCTION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of the study was to develop a scale measuring academic dishonesty of undergraduate students. The sample of the study constitutes nine hundred undergraduate students selected via random sampling technique. After receiving expert's opinions for the face and content validity of the scale, the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were applied. EFA favored a six factor structure viz: cheating in examination; plagiarism; outside help; prior cheating; falsification and lying about academic assignments. Moreover, the findings obtained from the CFA showed that the structure consisting of 23 items and the six factors associated to academic dishonesty scale (ADS) had adequate consistency indices. The internal consistency indices, alpha coefficient (α=.831) is adequate for the academic dishonesty scale (ADS). Results from the study confirmed multidimensionality and robust psychometric properties of academic dishonesty scale.

show abstract

Relation of gender, course enrollment, and grades to distinct forms of academic dishonesty

Cited by 85 publications

References 40 publications

Academic honesty: Perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables

Academic honesty: Perceptions of millennial university students and the role of moderating variables

Escala de Autorrelato de Trapaça-Admissão: Evidências de Validade Fatorial e Precisão

Development and Validation of Academic Dishonesty Scale (ADS): Presenting a Multidimensional Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About