Skip to main content

Ethical Antecedents of Cheating Intentions: Evidence of Mediation

Journal of Academic Ethics volume 6, pages 51–66 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

Although the pedagogy literature indicates significant relationships between cheating intentions and both personal and situational factors, no published research has examined the joint effect of personal moral philosophy and perceived moral intensity components on students’ cheating intentions. Hence, a structural equation model that relates magnitude of consequences, relativism, and idealism to willingness to cheat, is developed and tested. Using data from undergraduate business students, the empirical results provide insight into these relationships and evidence of mediation for magnitude of consequences on idealism and students’ cheating intentions. Implications for educators are offered.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, M. B., Ketz, J. E., & Owsen, D. (2003). Ethics education in accounting: Moving toward ethical motivation and ethical behavior. Journal of Accounting Education, 21, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, T., Bass, K., & Brown, G. (1996). Religiosity, ethical ideology, and intentions to report a peer’s wrongdoing. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1161–1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, T., & Valentine, S. (2004). Issue contingencies and marketers’ recognition of ethical issues, ethical judgments and behavioral intentions. Journal of Business Research, 57, 338–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, D., Connolly, J., Lentz, P., & Morrison, J. (2006). Using the business fraud triangle to predict academic dishonesty among business students. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 10, 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. S., & Choong, P. (2005). A investigation of academic dishonesty among business students at public and private United States universities. International Journal of Management, 22, 201–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruggeman, E. L., & Hart, K. J. (1996). Cheating, lying, and moral reasoning by religious and secular high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 89, 340–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley, R. M., Wiese, D. S., & Harvey, M. G. (1998). An investigation into the dimensions of unethical behavior. Journal of Education for Business, 73, 284–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrus, R. T., McGoldrick, K. M., & Schuhmann, P. W. (2007). Self-reports of student cheating: Does a definition of cheating matter? Journal of Economic Education, 38, 3–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., Karri, R., & Matula, T. (2005). Practicing what we teach – Ethical considerations for business schools. Journal of Academic Ethics, 3, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, K. J., Davis, R., Toy, D., & Wright, L. (2004). Academic integrity in the business school environment: I’ll get by with a little help from my friends. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, A., & Mee, L. S. (2000). The effects of issue characteristics on the recognition of moral issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choong, P., Ho, S., & McDonald, R. A. (2002). An examination of the effects of social desirability bias on business ethics: Research results. International Journal of Management, 19, 3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabholkar, P. A., & Kellaris, J. J. (1992). Toward understanding marketing students’ ethical Judgment of controversial personal selling practices. Journal of Business Research, 24, 313–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H., & McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, O. C., Gresham, L. G., & Fraedrich, J. (1989). A synthesis of ethical decision models for marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 9, 55–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. J. (1993). Social desirability bias and the validity of indirect questioning. Journal of Consumer Research, 20, 303–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. J., & Tellis, G. J. (1998). Removing social desirability bias with indirect questioning: Is the cure worse than the disease. In Advances in consumer research, vol. 25 (pp. 563–567). Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, S., Reichard, M., & Slane, S. (1987). Cheating as a function of task outcome and Machiavellianism. Journal of Psychology, 121, 423–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R. (1980). A taxonomy of ethical ideologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 175–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R. (1985). Individual differences in information integration during moral judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 264–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., & Nye, J. L. (1990). Personal moral philosophies and moral choice. Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 398–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., & Pope, W. R. (1984). Ethical ideology and judgments of social psychological research: Multidimensional analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1365–1375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsyth, D. R., Pope, W. R., & McMillan, J. H. (1985). Students’ reactions after cheating: An attributional analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 72–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. F. (2000). The impact of moral intensity on decision making in a business context. Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 181–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W. M., & Melvin, K. B. (1988). A scale for measuring attitude toward cheating. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 429–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glover, S. H., Bumpus, M. A., Logan, J. E., & Ciesla, J. R. (1997). Re-examining the influence of individual values on ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1319–1329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granitz, N., & Loewy, D. (2006). Applying ethical theories: Interpreting and responding to student plagiarism. Journal of Business Ethics, 72, 393–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair Jr., J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haswell, S., Jubb, P., & Wearing, B. (1999). Accounting students and cheating: A comparative study for Australia, South Africa and the UK. Teaching Business Ethics, 3, 211–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, N., & Introna, L. (2005). Systems for the production of plagiarists? The implications arising from the use of plagiarism detection systems in UK universities for Asian learners. Journal of Academic Ethics, 3, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D., & Laverie, D. A. (2004). Experiential learning and the Hunt–Vitell theory of ethics: Teaching marketing ethics by integrating theory and practice. Marketing Education Review, 14, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, E. D., & Pasternak, H. (2006). Moral intensity as a predictor of social responsibility. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 53–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16, 366–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahle, L. R., Shoham, A., Rose, G., Smith, M., & Batra, R. (2003). Economic versus personal future-oriented attitudes as consumer shopping indicators. Journal of Euromarketing, 12, 35–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D. (1995). Statistical power in structural equation modeling. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.) Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 100–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, P. C., & Elm, D. R. (2003). The effect of context on moral intensity of ethical issues: Revising Jones’s issue-contingent model. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, E. J., & Lawton, L. (1996). The effects of social and moral integration on ethical standards: A comparison of American and Ukranian students. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 901–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kisamore, J., Stone, T. H., & Jawahar, I. M. (2007). Academic integrity: The relationship between individual and situational factors on misconduct contemplations. Journal of Business Ethics, 75, 381–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, B., & Dewe, P. (1997). An investigation of the components of moral intensity. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 521–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, D. R., & Pauli, K. P. (2002). The role of moral intensity in ethical decision making. Business & Society, 41, 84–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McQuitty, S. (2004). Statistical power and structural equation models in business research. Journal of Business Research, 57, 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S. A., & McDonald, R. A. (1995). The role of moral intensity in moral judgments: An empirical investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 715–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. E. (2004). Observations on teaching marketing ethics. Marketing Education Review, 14, 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nill, A., & Schibrowsky, J. A. (2005). The impact of corporate culture, the reward system, and perceived moral intensity on marketing students’ ethical decision making. Journal of Marketing Education, 27, 68–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavela, G. (1997). Applying the power of association on campus: A model code of academic integrity. Journal of College and University Law, 24, 97–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preble, J. F., & Reichel, A. (1988). Attitudes towards business ethics of future managers in the U.S. and Israel. Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 941–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawwas, M. Y. A., & Singhapakdi, A. (1998). Do consumers’ ethical beliefs vary with age? A substantiation of Kohlberg’s typology in marketing. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 6, 26–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York, NY: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive scientist and his shortcomings: Distortions in the attribution process. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in experimental social psychology (pp. 173–220). New York, NY: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierra, J. J., & Hyman, M. R. (2006). A dual-process model of cheating intentions. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 193–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. L. (1993). The relationship between academic dishonesty and unethical business practices. Journal of Education for Business, 68, 207–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R., & Felton, E. (2006). Designing and delivering business ethics teaching and learning. Journal of Business Ethics, 63, 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M. S. (1996). The role of moral intensity and fairness perception in judgments of ethicality: A comparison of managerial professionals and the general public. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 469–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M. S., & Singer, A. E. (1997). Observer judgements about moral agents’ ethical decisions: The role of scope of justice and moral intensity. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 473–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A. (2004). Important factors underlying ethical intentions of students: Implications for marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 261–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S. J., & Franke, G. R. (1999). Antecedents, consequences, and mediating effects of perceived moral intensity and personal moral philosophies. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 19–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singhapakdi, A., Vitell, S. J., & Kraft, K. L. (1996). Moral intensity and ethical decision-making of marketing professionals. Journal of Business Research, 36, 245–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. J., Davy, J. A., & Easterling, D. (2004). An examination of cheating and its antecedents among marketing and management majors. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. J., Davy, J. A., Rosenberg, D. L., & Haight, G. T. (2002). A structural modeling investigation of the influence of demographic and attitudinal factors and in-class deterrents of cheating behavior among accounting students. Journal of Accounting Education, 20, 45–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stead, W. E., Worrell, D. L., & Stead, J. G. (1990). An integrative model of understanding and managing ethical behavior in business organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 9, 233–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storch, E. A., & Storch, J. B. (2002). Fraternities, sororities, and academic dishonesty. College Student Journal, 36, 247–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tang, S., & Zuo, J. (1997). Profile of college examination cheaters. College Student Journal, 31, 340–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tansey, R., Brown, G., Hyman, M. R., & Dawson Jr., L. E. (1994). Personal moral philosophies and the moral judgments of salespeople. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 14, 59–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teach, R. D., Christensen, S. L., & Schwartz, R. G. (2005). Teaching business ethics: Integrity. Simulation & Gaming, 36, 383–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tibbetts, S. G. (1999). Differences between women and men regarding decisions to commit test cheating. Research in Higher Education, 40, 323–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VansSandt, C. V. (2005). Three on three: A tale for business ethics classes. Journal of Management Education, 29, 475–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S. J., Rallapalli, K. C., & Singhapakdi, A. (1993). Marketing norms: The influence of personal moral philosophies and organizational ethical culture. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21, 331–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wajda-Johnston, V. A., Handal, P. J., Brawer, P. A., & Fabricatore, A. N. (2001). Academic dishonesty at the graduate level. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watley, L. D., & May, D. R. (2004). Enhancing moral intensity: The roles of personal and consequential information in ethical decision-making. Journal of Business Ethics, 50, 105–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, J. (1996). Influences upon managerial moral decision making: Nature of the harm and magnitude of consequences. Human Relations, 49, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, T., Ravenscroft, S. P., & Shrader, C. B. (2004). Cheating and moral judgment in the college classroom: A natural experiment. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 173–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39, 235–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winer, R. S. (1999). Experimentation in the 21st century: The importance of external validity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27, 349–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, McCoy College of Business Administration, Texas State University-San Marcos, 424 McCoy Hall, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA

    Jeremy J. Sierra

  2. College of Business, New Mexico State University, Box 30001, Dept. 5280, Las Cruces, NM, 88003–8001, USA

    Michael R. Hyman

Authors
  1. Jeremy J. Sierra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael R. Hyman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremy J. Sierra.

Appendix: Willingness to cheat scale items

Appendix: Willingness to cheat scale items

CheatWIL1

Assume it is 2 days before a 20-page paper is due in one of your friend’s courses. Your friend has yet to start it and suddenly realizes that it is worth 50% of the final course grade. (S)he has an 85% for the first half of the course and knows that receiving an ‘A’ for the final half of the course will lead to a final grade of ‘A’, which would qualify her/him for the Dean’s List for the first time. By qualifying for the Dean’s List, your friend will receive a prized fellowship for 1 year, which is given to a limited number of students. Your friend does not like the topic of the paper and believes that this is the only time in her/his college career that it will be necessary to write a paper on that topic. Your friend mentions this problem to a roommate, who after a few minutes of searching through old course files finds a completed paper on the topic, hands it to your friend, and tells him/her that two semesters ago it earned an ‘A’ for the same course assignment. Roughly 60 other students are enrolled in this course and your friend believes that the instructor will not read every paper carefully; thus, your friend believes that the instructor will not recognize this paper as the one submitted two semesters ago if a few words are changed here and there.

What is the probability that your friend will choose to plagiarize this assignment? (Please circle your answer.)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%.

CheatWIL2

It is the afternoon of your friend’s last final exam of his/her junior year. (S)he currently has an 87% in the course. Your friend knows that if (s)he scores 90% or above on this exam, then (s)he will receive an ‘A’ in the course and will make the Dean’s List. Making the Dean’s List gives your friend a good chance to win a scholarship for next year, since there are a limited number of scholarship winners each year. Your friend knows that (s)he could have studied more, but believes that (s)he understands the basic concepts well enough for an essay exam. Before distributing the exams, the teaching assistant explains that the professor was ill this week and asked the assistant to create a multiple-choice exam from the test bank for the textbook. Your friend knows that the student sitting next to her/him has a 4.00 average. The course syllabus states that anyone caught cheating on an exam/assignment receives an ‘F’ for that exam/ assignment; as a result of its importance to the overall course grade, your friend would receive a ‘C’ in the course if caught cheating on this exam. After distributing the exams, the teaching assistant apologizes for needing to leave the room, but promises to return soon.

What is the probability that your friend will choose to cheat on the exam? (Please circle your answer.)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sierra, J.J., Hyman, M.R. Ethical Antecedents of Cheating Intentions: Evidence of Mediation. J Acad Ethics 6, 51–66 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-008-9056-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-008-9056-x

Keywords

  • Idealism
  • Mediation
  • Moral intensity
  • Structural equation model
  • Student cheating
  • Vignette-based research