Blurring boundaries: Research assistance and the risk of contract cheating in postgraduate education in Africa

Abstract

This commentary examines the growing concern of blurred boundaries between legitimate research assistance and contract cheating in postgraduate education, particularly within Africa. In this commentary, we argue that while research assistance is often vital for students facing challenges such as inadequate institutional support, funding shortages, and mentorship gaps, it risks morphing into contract cheating. This practice undermines academic integrity and devalues the value of higher education. The African context introduces unique dynamics, where promises of future favors or employment can serve as incentives for unethical outsourcing of intellectual labor. This phenomenon erodes critical skills development, perpetuates inequality, and threatens the credibility of African universities on the global stage.

Introduction

Academic integrity and ethical conduct form the foundation of credible research, without which scientific findings lose their reliability and public trust (Acharya, 2024; Robishaw et al., 2020). In recent years, the landscape of postgraduate education in Africa has experienced significant change. With greater access to digital resources and global academic networks, students are now better equipped than ever to pursue advanced degrees (Altbach et al., 2019; Saykili, 2019). Among these developments, a growing concern has emerged: the blurred line between legitimate research assistance and contract cheating. This issue prompts important questions about academic integrity, fairness, and the broader consequences for postgraduate research students (MPhil, MRes, PhD) across the continent. Most existing research on contract cheating has focused on coursework assignments, essays, and examinations, with little to no systematic attention given to research assistance in postgraduate contexts (Amigud and Dawson, 2020; Liyanagamage et al., 2025). This omission suggests that the experiences and challenges of postgraduate researchers have been understudied. Liyanagamage et al. (2025), in their systematic review, confirm that postgraduate research students are largely absent from the samples used in contract cheating studies. Addressing this gap is therefore crucial, as it introduces a fresh dimension to ongoing debates about the scope of contract cheating and its implications for academic integrity. This commentary examines research assistance and how it is gradually evolving into contract cheating.

First, it is important to conceptualize contract cheating. The term “contract cheating” is first attributed to Clarke and Lancaster (2006), who described it as “the submission of work by students for academic credit which the students have paid contractors to write for them.” Curtis and Clare (2017) also expanded Clarke and Lancaster’s (2006) definition by specifying the type of works (i.e., thesis, report, essay) which when outsourced and later presented as their own, could be described as contract cheating. However, the definition of contract cheating has evolved to encompass a broader range of activities, including those that involve non-commercial elements such as favors or informal assistance (Awdry, 2021; Bretag et al., 2019). Bretag et al. (2019) identified four major characteristics of contract cheating: (a) there is an outsourcing to a third party; (b) the third party could be a fellow student, friend or family member; (c) may be paid or unpaid; and, (d) involves an assessment (i.e., exam, assignment, thesis, computer coding, etc.). In places like Canada, terms like “paper mill” or “essay mill” are used to describe acts of contract cheating (Eaton, 2022). So, unlike ethical assistance, which involves guiding students, providing feedback, and helping them refine their ideas while ensuring that the final product remains their own, in contract cheating, the student outsources the core intellectual labor entirely. In this commentary, we conceptualize contract cheating as a situation where a postgraduate research student outsources sections of their thesis/dissertation to a third party (whether friend, family member, colleague, or writing firm), and later presents that work as their own.

The rise of research assistance

In the pursuit of postgraduate research education, getting research assistance is almost inevitable. The term “research assistance” encompasses a wide spectrum of external support services sought by students to navigate the complexities of their academic projects. On one end of this spectrum lies legitimate pedagogical aid, designed to supplement formal education and build the researcher’s skills. This includes services like one-on-one tutoring to clarify complex methodologies, professional editing to refine grammar and formatting without altering core arguments, and statistical consulting to ensure appropriate data analysis and interpretation (Pollon et al., 2013). Also in this category are technical services such as interview transcription or data entry that free up the researcher to focus on analysis and writing. When utilized correctly, these forms of assistance act as a scaffold, empowering postgraduate research students to produce higher-quality work and learn effectively. On the other end of the spectrum, however, are practices that blur the line between assistance and academic dishonesty. This is where assistance transitions from support to substitution. It includes services that offer to write entire sections of a thesis, conduct analysis with no input from the researcher, or substantively rewrite a student’s ideas to the point where authorship becomes questionable.

In resource-constrained settings like Africa, many postgraduate research students face challenges that complicate their academic journey. The existing literature indicates that challenges, including insufficient institutional support, inadequate funding, poor library infrastructure, high workload, and inadequate mentorship, impede the capacity of postgraduate researchers to independently meet rigorous academic standards (Kisansa and Lubinga, 2020; Okyere et al., 2015; Sumaila et al., 2020). Kisansa and Lubinga (2020) report that in South Africa, about 61% and 48% cite workload and insufficient supervision support as key challenges. In such instances, having access to external help (i.e., tutoring, editorial services, or statistical analysis) brings a sense of relief to the researcher. This implies that research assistance is intended to empower postgraduate researchers to overcome the numerous challenges they encounter and produce high-quality work. With the proliferation of technology and online research assistance platforms, there is a concern about whether postgraduate researchers are truly receiving assistance or whether it is a smokescreen for outsourcing academic work. Could research assistance be undermining the very essence of higher education: intellectual growth, original thought, and personal achievement? These are critical questions that require deeper interrogation.

Defining the boundaries

As previously stated, research assistance itself is a valuable tool to support the overwhelming demands of postgraduate research work. However, where do we draw the line? At what point would research assistance morph into contract cheating? These are pertinent questions that must be answered. The contract cheating industry is a big one. Newton (2018) asserts that globally, nearly 31 million students have engaged in contract cheating. The COVID-19 pandemic further increased the incidence of contract cheating (Hill et al., 2021). This industry is further estimated to be worth over a billion dollars per annum (Liyanagamage et al., 2025), thus raising significant concerns about the future of postgraduate research integrity.

It must be noted that while the traditional definition of contract cheating emphasizes payments, the African perspective has a twist to it. As indicated by Awdry (2021), contract cheating does not always involve monetary transactions, but may manifest on the back of favors. Amigud and Lancaster (2020) have also argued that students who cannot afford to outsource their academic work enter a barter-like agreement where they exchange favors for a completed academic task. Similar power imbalances have been observed in studies of commercial contract cheating services, where students often exploit or are themselves exploited by providers (Bretag et al., 2019). Contract cheating service providers may also exert pressure on student clients or on their own employees, demonstrating how unequal relationships shape decisions to outsource academic labor and perpetuate unethical practices (Liyanagamage et al., 2025).

Anecdotal knowledge of postgraduate research in Africa shows that often, researchers select individuals who are below them in terms of the highest educational attainment. For instance, a master’s by research student would employ a recently graduated bachelor’s degree holder as a research assistant; a doctoral researcher would also employ someone with either a bachelor’s degree or a recent master’s graduate. This power dynamic makes it easy for the postgraduate researcher to change the assistance relationship into contract cheating without necessarily paying the assistant. In most cases, research assistants are people who have the desire to also further their education to the next level or get full-time employment. As such, the postgraduate researcher capitalizes on this desire to make promises (e.g., promising to assist them with paying for the application, linking them to faculty members in their school, reviewing their statement of purpose, or securing a job for them). Such enticement creates an enabling environment for research assistance to easily morph into contract cheating.

Implications for postgraduate education

The insidious creep of contract cheating, disguised as legitimate research assistance, poses profound and multifaceted implications for postgraduate education, particularly within the African context. This fundamentally erodes academic integrity, which is the bedrock of credible research and scholarship. When students outsource their intellectual labor, they bypass the rigorous process of critical thinking, problem-solving, and independent inquiry that is essential for developing research competence. This not only devalues the postgraduate degree but also undermines the public’s trust in academic institutions and the research they produce. The long-term consequences include a decline in the quality and originality of research output, as students who have not genuinely engaged with their work are less likely to contribute meaningfully to their fields.

It must be noted that this phenomenon hinders the development of essential research skills among postgraduate students. The journey of a postgraduate researcher is meant to be transformative, fostering skills in literature review, methodology design, data analysis, and scholarly writing (Scally and Cameron, 2017). If these core intellectual activities are delegated to others, students are deprived of the opportunity to cultivate these crucial competencies. This creates a generation of graduates who may hold advanced degrees but lack the practical skills and intellectual resilience required to conduct independent research or contribute effectively to academia, industry, or policymaking. The reliance on external assistance also fosters a dependency that can impede future academic and professional growth, making it difficult for these individuals to navigate complex research challenges autonomously.

Also, the prevalence of contract cheating can exacerbate existing inequalities within the postgraduate education system. While some students may genuinely seek assistance due to resource constraints or inadequate institutional support, the ease with which this assistance can morph into cheating creates an unfair advantage for those who can afford to outsource their work. This undermines the meritocratic principles of higher education, where success should be based on individual effort and intellectual prowess. Furthermore, the unique African context, where promises of future favors or employment can serve as currency for contract cheating, introduces a complex ethical dilemma that exploits power dynamics and vulnerabilities. This form of quid pro quo cheating not only compromises academic integrity but also perpetuates a cycle of unethical practices that can extend beyond the academic realm into professional life.

Finally, the unchecked proliferation of contract cheating threatens the global reputation of African universities and their postgraduate research programs. In an increasingly interconnected academic world, the credibility of degrees and research outputs is paramount. If African institutions are perceived as breeding grounds for academic dishonesty, it can lead to a devaluation of their qualifications, making it harder for their graduates to compete internationally for academic positions, research grants, or employment opportunities. This tarnishes the hard-earned reputation of legitimate scholars and institutions, hindering collaborative research efforts and limiting the continent’s contribution to global knowledge production.

A call to action

In conclusion, the challenge of distinguishing between legitimate research assistance and contract cheating is not confined to the actions of students but implicates the entire academic ecosystem. The conversation must expand to include the standard practices of professional academics. While having a research assistant collect data is generally considered a technical task, the ethical lines blur when their contribution extends to writing substantial parts of a literature review. At this point, the role shifts from providing technical support to making a significant intellectual contribution (i.e., the conceptualization of the research idea, preparing the literature review, and actual writing; Rahman et al., 2017).

The conventional solution in professional academia is transparent acknowledgment or co-authorship. However, this model does not neatly apply to postgraduate education, where the primary purpose of the research output (the thesis or dissertation) is the assessment of a single individual’s capability. A student cannot simply acknowledge a third party for writing a chapter, as it would defeat the purpose of the examination. This highlights that the ethical dilemma is context-dependent, forcing us to confront a difficult truth: some practices acceptable for a tenured professor are clear academic misconduct for a doctoral candidate.

There is a need for stronger enforcement of academic integrity policies across all higher education institutions. Universities must adopt clear, unambiguous, and zero-tolerance stances on contract cheating, supported by transparent guidelines and consistent consequences. This includes implementing advanced plagiarism detection software that can identify outsourced work, developing robust reporting mechanisms for suspected cases, and ensuring that disciplinary actions are applied fairly and consistently. Also, educational campaigns should be launched to raise awareness among students and all other categories of academics about the ethical implications and severe repercussions of contract cheating, emphasizing the long-term damage to their academic and professional careers (Ahsan et al., 2022).

At the micro-level, supervisors play a pivotal role and must be empowered and incentivized to provide more intensive mentorship and supervision to their research students. This involves not only academic guidance but also fostering a strong ethical compass and instilling values of academic integrity. Training programs for supervisors on identifying and addressing contract cheating, as well as promoting ethical research practices, are crucial. However, such initiatives cannot be effective in isolation if institutions continue to uphold inconsistent standards for different groups within academia. It would be counterproductive, and even hypocritical, to penalize students for behaviors that may be tolerated among senior academics. Therefore, promoting a culture of integrity requires policies that are consistently applied across all academic ranks. Regular and meaningful engagement between supervisors and students can help identify early signs of distress or academic struggle, allowing for timely intervention and support before students resort to illicit means.