TY - JOUR
T1 - Who cheats at university? A self-report study of dishonest academic behaviours in a sample of Australian university students
AU - Marsden, Helen
AU - Carroll, Marie
AU - Neill, James T.
PY - 2005/5
Y1 - 2005/5
N2 - The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.
AB - The present study investigated the dishonest academic behaviours of Australian university students (N= 954) and their relationships with demographic factors, academic policy advised to students, academic self-efficacy, and academic orientation. It was hypothesised that higher levels of dishonesty would be associated with low learning-orientation, high grade-orientation, low academic self-efficacy and nonreceipt of information about the rules of cheating and plagiarism. Descriptive analyses revealed high levels of three types of self-reported academic dishonesty: cheating, plagiarism and falsification. Regression analyses revealed demographic variables, academic orientation and academic self-efficacy to have differential predictive value for the three types of dishonesty, underlining the argument that it is misleading to measure academic dishonesty as a unidimensional construct. The results are discussed in terms of implications for strategic interventions and university policy formulation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=22144437782&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/00049530412331283426
DO - 10.1080/00049530412331283426
M3 - Review article
SN - 0004-9530
VL - 57
SP - 1
EP - 10
JO - Australian Journal of Psychology
JF - Australian Journal of Psychology
IS - 1
ER -