Undergraduate cheating: Who does what and why?

Franklyn-Stokes, Arlene; Newstead, Stephen E.

doi:10.1080/03075079512331381673

Cited by 267 publications

(185 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

154

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… Patchwriting: the practice of basing one's writing very closely on existing text (Abasi et al, 2006;Howard, 1995;Pecorari, 2003)  Time pressure as an obstacle to authorial identity and risk factor for plagiarism (Dordoy, 2002; Franklyn-Stokes & Newstead, 1995).  Goal orientation or expectation of higher grades as an obstacle to authorial identity and risk factor for plagiarism (Bennett, 2005;Dordoy, 2002;Franklyn-Stokes & Newstead, 1995).  The importance of argument and expression of one's own ideas (Abasi et al, 2006;Bonnet, 2001;Read et al, 2001;Wells, 1993).…”

Section: Study 2: Questionnaire Survey Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student beliefs and attitudes about authorial identity in academic writing

Pittam

Elander

Lusher

et al. 2009

Studies in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Authorial identity is the sense a writer has of themselves as an author and the textual identity they construct in their writing. This paper describes two studies exploring psychology students' authorial identity in academic writing. A qualitative focus group study with 19 students showed that authorial identity was largely unfamiliar to students, and highlighted the obstacles perceived by students to constructing authorial identities in university assignments. A questionnaire survey of 318 students explored the factor structure of an 18-item Student Authorship Questionnaire (SAQ). Three factors described aspects of student authorial identity ('confidence in writing', 'understanding authorship' and 'knowledge to avoid plagiarism'), and three factors described approaches to writing ('top-down', 'bottom-up' and 'pragmatic'). Confidence in writing and knowledge to avoid plagiarism were significantly higher among year two than year one students. Both studies could inform interventions to reduce unintentional plagiarism by improving students' authorial identity.

show abstract

Section: Study 2: Questionnaire Survey Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student beliefs and attitudes about authorial identity in academic writing

Pittam

Elander

Lusher

et al. 2009

Studies in Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in the UK, Franklyn-Stokes and Newstead (1995) reported high levels of cheating and Newstead, Franklin-Stokes, and Armstead (1996) found that less able, less intrinsically motivated younger male students tended to cheat more. These findings were confirmed in later UK based work by Norton, Tilley, Newstead and Franklyn-Stokes (2001).…”

Section: Cheating In An Academic Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of academic cheating behavior: The future for accountancy in Ireland

Ballantine¹,

Larres

Mulgrew

2014

Accounting Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[12] Over the past decade much research has been published concentrating on the prevalence of academic cheating. The primary forms of academic cheating include behaviors such as plagiarism [13,14] cheating on exams [15,16] improperly working together on assignments, [17] allowing others to unethically extract information from their exams or assignments, [17][18][19] and misconduct in the clinical setting, such as violating patient confidentiality protections and improperly recording procedures that were not performed. [4,20] Additionally, prior research focused on distinguishing between premeditated cheating and spontaneous cheating.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social desirability bias in relation to academic cheating behaviors of nursing students

Winrow

Reitmaier-Koehler

Winrow

2015

JNEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between academic cheating and a series of academic and demographic characteristics, as well as the relationship between the various characteristics and social desirability bias. The population for the study was comprised of 626 nursing students (pre-nursing, baccalaureate students formally admitted into the program, and graduate students) attending a regional comprehensive university located in the Midwest. The results of the study revealed that 53.8% of undergraduate students and 36.5% of graduate students self-reported having engaged in at least one of the 16 forms of academic cheating during the previous semester, primarily in acts classified as plagiarism. The current study further explored misconduct among students seeking a BSN and found that 35.2% of students participated in at least one act of professional misconduct in the clinical setting. There were statistically significant differences between the characteristics of age and prevalence of plagiarism-related academic cheating, planned cheating, spontaneous cheating, and professional misconduct, implying that older students cheat less frequently. Likewise, the more credits a student completed the less likely they were to plagiarize or engage in spontaneous cheating. Additionally, older students and students having completed higher number of credits received higher scores on the social desirability scale, implying they had a higher tendency to display social desirability bias.

show abstract

Undergraduate cheating: Who does what and why?

Cited by 267 publications

References 5 publications

Student beliefs and attitudes about authorial identity in academic writing

Student beliefs and attitudes about authorial identity in academic writing

Determinants of academic cheating behavior: The future for accountancy in Ireland

Social desirability bias in relation to academic cheating behaviors of nursing students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About