Research in Higher Education

, Volume 37, Issue 4, pp 487–502 | Cite as

College cheating: Ten years later

  • George M. Diekhoff
  • Emily E. LaBeff
  • Robert E. Clark
  • Larry E. Williams
  • Billy Francis
  • Valerie J. Haines
Article

Abstract

In this 10-year follow-up study of student cheating, we surveyed 474 university students to (1) evaluate the extent of cheating; (2) assess attitudes toward cheating; (3) identify variables that discriminate between cheaters and noncheaters; (4) assess the relative effectiveness of various deterrents to cheating; and (5) examine changes in cheating attitudes and behaviors from 1984 to 1994. Most students (61.2%) reported cheating in 1994, up significantly from 54.1% in 1984 (Haines et al., 1986). Despite this increased cheating, students in 1994 were significantly less likely than in 1984 to neutralize (rationalize) their cheating. Ten variables that discriminated between cheaters and noncheaters in 1984 did so again in 1994, and 12 additional discriminating variables were identified. A principal components analysis of these 22 variables indicated that, compared to noncheaters, cheaters are (1) less mature; (2) less reactive to observed cheating; (3) less deterred by social stigma and guilt and more likely to neutralize cheating; (4) less personally invested in their education; and (5) more likely to be receiving scholarships, but doing less well in school. Both cheaters and noncheaters rated embarrassment and fear of punishment as the strongest deterrents to cheating; disapproval of one's friends was ranked as the least effective deterrent by both groups.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davis, S., Grover, C., Becker, A., and McGregor, L. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments.Teaching of Psychology 19(1): 16–20.Google Scholar
  2. Forsyth, D. R., Pope, W. R., and McMillan, J. H. (1985). Students' reactions after cheating: An attributional analysis.Contemporary Educational Psychology 10: 72–82.Google Scholar
  3. Gardner, W. M., Roper, J. T., Gonzalez, C. C., and Simpson, R. G. (1988). Analysis of cheating on academic assignments.The Psychological Record 38: 543–555.Google Scholar
  4. Haines, V. J., Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E., and Clark, R. E. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment, and the neutralizing attitude.Research in Higher Education 25: 342–354.Google Scholar
  5. Jendrek, M. P. (1989). Faculty reactions to academic dishonesty.Journal of College Student Development 30(5): 401–406.Google Scholar
  6. Jendrek, M. P. (1992). Student reactions to academic dishonesty.Journal of College Student Development 33(3): 260–273.Google Scholar
  7. Kohlberg, L. (1964). Development of moral character and moral ideology. In M. Hoffman and L. W. Hoffman (eds.),Review of Child Development Research, p. 400. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  8. Maramark, S., and Maline, M. B. (1993).Academic Dishonesty Among College Students. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  9. May, K. M., and Loyd, B. (1993). Academic dishonesty: The honor system and students' attitudes.Journal of College Student Development 34(2): 125–129.Google Scholar
  10. McCabe, D. L. (1992). The influence of situational ethics on cheating among college students.Sociological Inquiry 62(3): 365–374.Google Scholar
  11. McCabe, D. L., and Bowers, W. J. (1994). Academic dishonesty among males in college: A thirty-year perspective.Journal of College Student Development 35: 5–10.Google Scholar
  12. McCabe, D. L., and Trevino, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences.The Journal of Higher Education 64(5): 522–538.Google Scholar
  13. Michaels, J. W. (1989). Applying theories of deviance to academic cheating.Social Science Quarterly 70(4): 870–885.Google Scholar
  14. Pactor, H. S., McKeen, W., and Morris, J. (1990). Students' ethics require new ways to cope with cheating.Journalism Educator 44(4): 57–59.Google Scholar
  15. Sykes, G., and Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency.American Sociological Review 22: 664–670.Google Scholar
  16. Ward, D. A., and Beck, W. L. (1990). Gender and dishonesty.Journal of Social Psychology 130(3): 333–339.Google Scholar
  17. Welsh, J. F. (1993). Student academic dishonesty in higher education: Social context and institutional response. Unpublished report, Kansas Board of Regents, Topeka, Kansas.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • George M. Diekhoff
    • 1
  • Emily E. LaBeff
    • 2
  • Robert E. Clark
    • 2
  • Larry E. Williams
    • 2
  • Billy Francis
    • 1
  • Valerie J. Haines
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMidwestern State UniversityWichita FallsUSA
  2. 2.Department of SociologyMidwestern State UniversityUSA
  3. 3.Wichita General HospitalUSA

Personalised recommendations