College Cheating: A Twenty-Year Follow-Up and the Addition of an Honor Code

Vandehey, Michael A.; Diekhoff, George M.; LaBeff, Emily E.

doi:10.1353/csd.2007.0043

Cited by 127 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In previous time-lag studies of plagiarism, plagiarism was found to either have increased from the initial measurement (Diekhoff et al, 1996;McCabe &Bowers, 1994) or, at best, stabilized (Vandehey et al, 2007). In contrast, the downward trend observed in our data is encouraging, and may suggest that the combination of efforts put in place to reduce plagiarism is having a demonstrable effect.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

“…Vandehey, Diekhoff and LaBeff (2007) repeated Diekhoff et al's survey another 10 years later, in 2004, and found that rates of cheating had stabilized, albeit after the introduction of an honor code for students.…”

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…As important as these studies are in providing some evidence of historical changes in plagiarism rates, with the exception of Vandehey et al (2007), the other studies only include two points of measurement. As the saying goes, two data points don't make a trend, they make a line.…”

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Different measurement in different studies limits the utility of those studies and the conclusions that can be drawn from them. For example, although clearly a significant contribution to the literature in terms of charting historical change, Vandehey et al (2007) only asked students three questions: whether they had cheated on:1. exams, 2. quizzes, and 3. assignments. Such questions require students to recognize that they acted outside the rules of academic integrity and, therefore, do not assess inadvertent rule breaches where students were unaware that they had cheated.…”

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement

Curtis

Vardanega

2016

Higher Education Research & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are more students cheating on assessment tasks in higher education? Despite ongoing media speculation concerning increased 'copying and pasting' and ghostwritten assignments produced by 'paper mills', few studies have charted historical trends in rates and types of plagiarism. Additionally, there has been little comment from researchers as to the best way to assess changes in plagiarism over time. In this paper we discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of research designs for assessing changes in plagiarism over time, namely: cross-sectional, longitudinal, and time-lag. We also report the results of our own time-lag study of plagiarism. We assessed self-reported engagement in, awareness of, and attitudes toward plagiarism in three comparable groups of students at the same university on three occasions, each separated by 5 years (2004, 2009, and 2014). The data from our study paints an encouraging picture of increased understanding and reduced occurrence of several forms of plagiarism, with no upward trend in verbatim copying or ghost writing. We suggest that technological and educational initiatives are counteracting the potential for increased plagiarism from online sources.Keywords: Plagiarism, academic integrity, cheating, ghost writing, trend, time-lag, longitudinal Is plagiarism changing 3 Recently in Australia (e.g., 2014Australia (e.g., -2015 there have been several dramatic and shocking reports on serious breaches of academic integrity. A prominent scandal was the discovery of the MyMaster paper mill, which provided customwritten assignments, mostly to Chinese-speaking students, at a number of universities across Australia (McNeilage & Visentin, 2014). This was followed by the Independent Commission Against Corruption's (ICAC, 2015) report into accusations of widespread cheating, particularly by international students, in Australia. Soon after, an internal report from the University of Sydney uncovered numerous instances and forms of academic misconduct among students. Among the documented breaches and allegations were instances of ghost writing, fabrication of data, and students employing others to sit exams in their place (Smith, 2015). Of course, such concerns and anecdotes are not limited to Australia and instances of, and responses to, plagiarism remain a serious concern for higher education globally.Revelations such as those in Australia always raise the question in the media 'Is cheating at university on the rise?'. Such media stories inevitably suggest that cheating has been facilitated by the internet, where students can easily copy and paste electronic content, and make contact with paper mills and ghost writers. However, such stories often neglect the balancing effects that technology has afforded in counteracting academic misconduct (Park, 2003). To be sure, over the past decade the internet has afforded students increased and unique opportunities to engage in plagiarism. By the same token, the internet has also provided significant opportunities for universities and academics...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Historical Trends In Plagiarismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement

Curtis

Vardanega

2016

Higher Education Research & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These campuses generally have higher levels of peer reporting of cheating (McCabe, Trevino, & Butterfield, 2001). Yet Vandehey, Diekhoff, and LaBeff (2007) reported no change in students' self-reporting of cheating following the imposition of an honor code, and they found non-cheaters are much more supportive of the honor code than cheaters. Thus, a change in policy alone may not have an effect.…”

Section: Honor Codesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faculty Observables and Self-Reported Responsiveness to Academic Dishonesty

Burrus¹,

Jones²,

Sackley³

et al. 2015

AIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior to 2009, a mid-sized Keywords: academic honesty, faculty, administration, honor code he cheating epidemic in universities across the world is well documented, with recent research taking the problem as given and examining factors that contribute to cheating or whether the problem is getting worse. In the effort to develop policies to prevent student cheating, many studies have focused on factors correlated with academic dishonesty. These factors broadly include individual student characteristics (age, gender, grade-point average, and membership in a fraternity or sorority), perceptions about the cheating of peers, whether professors are clear in defining cheating, and perceptions about the likelihood of being caught for cheating and the severity of penalties if caught. The research presented in this article contributes to the literature by focusing on changes in faculty vigilance and attitudes, rather than focusing on students, following the imposition of an honor code.While there is a growing consensus that cheating is a problem on academic campuses, the more difficult as well as more interesting topics may be causes and prevention methods. In general, students and faculty have substantially similar views of what is considered cheating. Roig and Ballew (1994) find that T

show abstract

Deception and Applicant Faking: Putting the Pieces Together

Zaccaro

DiRosa

2012

International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

College Cheating: A Twenty-Year Follow-Up and the Addition of an Honor Code

Cited by 127 publications

References 20 publications

Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement

Is plagiarism changing over time? A 10-year time-lag study with three points of measurement

Faculty Observables and Self-Reported Responsiveness to Academic Dishonesty

Deception and Applicant Faking: Putting the Pieces Together

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About