Triangle's Fraud Theory on Academic Fraud Behavior When online Learning

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to examine the dimensions of the fraud triangle to explain academic cheating behavior during online learning. Theoretical Framework: The theory that examines the causes of fraud is the fraud triangle theory. This theory was first put forward by Edwin Sutherland, who coined the term white-color crime, and Donald Cressey, who was a student of Sutherland's in a doctoral program in the 1940s and author of Other People Money: A Study in the Social Psychology of Embezzlement. Design/Methodology/Approach: This study uses multiple regression analysis with the number of samples of this study are 73 accounting students at the Indonesian Christian University in Maluku who have passed auditing courses and business and professional ethics. Data were collected using a survey method. Findings: The results of this study indicate that partial pressure and opportunity affect academic cheating, while rationalization does not affect academic cheating. This study also shows that simultaneously academic fraud is determined by the dimensions of the fraud triangle, namely pressure, opportunity, and rationalization. Research, Practical & Social Implications: The implication of this research is to provide useful input to institutions, especially the UKIM Faculty of Economics and Business, to make online learning standards. Also, the teaching staff as input in the teaching and learning process pays attention that pressure, opportunity, and rationalization are important to determine student behavior in academic fraud. Originality/Value: The results of this research indicate that rationalization does not influence academic fraud behaviors. Rationalization is self-justification or the wrong reasons for wrong behavior. This is due to the awareness of the perpetrators of academic fraud that the fraud committed is an act that is not commendable, so guilt arises when committing academic fraud. It does not support the fraud triangle theory which states that rationalization encourages fraud.

Academic integrity in the information age: insights from health sciences students at a South African University

“…The Fraud Triangle is a well-established theoretical framework in criminology and fraud prevention. Originally proposed by Cressey (1953), the Fraud Triangle has been employed to understand fraudulent behaviour in various contexts, including academic dishonesty (Burke and Sanney, 2018;Choo and Tan, 2008;Connolly et al, 2006;Hamid et al, 2017;Persulessy et al, 2022). This framework draws on three components as the major drivers leading to student cheating: pressure/motivation; opportunity and rationalisation.…”

Fraud Triangle, Integritas, dan Penggunaan Teknologi Informasi terhadap Kecurangan Akademik Masa Pandemi Covid-19

“…Semakin besar peluang bagi seseorang untuk melakukan kecurangan, semakin besar kemungkinan orang tersebut melakukan suatu tindakan curang. Sejumlah penelitian berskala internasional terkait permasalahan ini juga menjelaskan bahwa peluang akan mempengaruhi mahasiswa dalam berbuat curang karena kondisi terbuka untuk melakukan kecurangan (Persulessy et al, 2022;Comas-Forgas et al, 2021).…”

“…Integritas mahasiswa diperoleh beberapa penelitian terdahulu diperoleh tidak mempunyai pengaruh terhadap kegiatan kecurangan; dalam arti bahwa semakin tinggi tingkat integritas yang dimiliki mahasiswa, maka semakin kecil terjadinya kecurangan (Wardana et al, 2017;Jannah et al, 2020;Mulyadi et al, 2021). Sejumlah penelitian juga menemukan integritas siswa tidak berpengaruh signifikan terhadap kecurangan akademik yang dilakukannya pada masa pandemi Covid-19 (Comas-Forgas et al, 2021;Persulessy et al, 2022). H4: Integritas mahasiswa berpengaruh signifikan terhadap perilaku kecurangan akademik mahasiswa akuntansi dalam pandemi Covid-19.…”

“…Peluang bisa muncul kapan saja, sehingga diperlukan pengawasan yang efektif untuk menghindarinya. Bagaimanapun, hasil ini bertolak belakang dengan temuan yang diperoleh Aziz (2019), Burke & Sanney (2018), Persulessy et al (2022) serta Juniariani & Pradnyanitasari (2019) yang menyatakan bahwa peluang tidak berpengaruh pada kecurangan akademik yang dilakukan oleh mahasiswa dikarenakan pengawas ujian yang ketat dan mahasiswa takut dengan ancaman dari dosen yang akan memberikan nilai "E" jika diketahui melakukan kecurangan akademik. Sistem pengendalian ini menunjukkan bahwa memiliki peluang besar akan memungkinkan mahasiswa untuk melakukan kecurangan tanpa diketahui oleh dosen pengawas.…”