Psychology students completed a task with reinforcement for successful performance. We tested academic integrity under randomly assigned conditions of check mark acknowledgment of an honor pledge, typed honor pledge, or no pledge. Across all conditions, 14.1% of students inflated their self-reported performance (i.e., cheated). We found no significant differences in the likelihood of cheating under differing honor pledge conditions. Students were more likely to cheat in late semester (20.2% and 16.0%) compared to the early semester condition (9.6%). Our research is important in understanding the frequency and timing of online academic dishonesty.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaronJ.CrooksS. M. (2005). Academic integrity in Web based distance education. Tech Trends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49(2), 40–45.
2.
BunnD. N.CaudillS. B.GropperD. M. (1992). Crime in the classroom: An economic analysis of undergraduate student cheating behavior. Journal of Economic Education, 23, 197–207.
3.
DavisS. F.GroverC. A.BeckerA. H.McGregorL. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 16–20.
4.
EydeL. D. (2000). Other responsibilities to participants. In SalesB. D.FolkmanS. (Eds.), Ethics in research with human participants (pp. 61–73). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
5.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
6.
FishbeinL. (1993, December 1). Curbing cheating and restoring academic integrity. Chronicle of Higher Education, 40, A52.
7.
GrijalvaT. C.NowellC.KerkvlietJ. (2006). Academic honesty and online courses. College Student Journal, 40, 180–185.
8.
HainesV. J.DiekhoffG. M.LaBeffE. E.ClarkR. E. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25, 342–354.
9.
KennedyK.NowakS.RaghuramanR.ThomasJ.DavisS. F. (2000). Academic dishonesty and distance learning: Student and faculty views. College Student Journal, 34, 309–314.
10.
KerkvlietJ.SigmundC. L. (1999). Can we control cheating in the classroom. Research in Economic Education, 30, 331–343.
11.
McCabeD. L.TreviñoL. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. Journal of Higher Education, 64, 522–538.
12.
McCabeD. L.TreviñoL. K.ButterfieldK. D. (1999). Academic integrity in honor code and non-honor code environments: A qualitative investigation. Journal of Higher Education, 70, 211–234.
13.
McCabeD. L.TreviñoL. K.ButterfieldK. D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modified honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, 43, 357–378.
14.
RidleyD. R.HusbandJ. E. (1998). Online education: A study of academic rigor and integrity. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25, 184–188.
15.
SinghalA. C. (1982). Factors in students' dishonesty. Psychological Reports, 51, 775–780.
