A sample of 327 engineering bachelor students from a public university in Mexico took part in an information integration study to explore systematic thinking underlying propensity for cheating during a course exam. All study participants were provided with written descriptions of 12 scenarios pertaining to the academic evaluation criteria and were asked to rate the likelihood that they would cheat under such circumstances. The 12 scenarios reflected the experimental manipulation of three orthogonal factors: teacher's teaching style, type of exam, and modality of assessment. Analysis results revealed four distinct attitudes toward cheating among students, two of which were independent of context (low and high desire to cheat) while the remaining two were contextdependent (low and moderate desire to cheat). All groups showed systematic thinking underlying their possible desire to cheat that was typified by the use of a summative cognitive rule for integrating information related to academic cheating. However, evaluation of factor relevance varied across the groups.