Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Factors Influencing Academic Dishonesty among Undergraduate Students at Russian Universities

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Student academic dishonesty is a pervasive problem for universities all over the world. The development of innovative practices and interventions for decreasing dishonest behaviour requires understanding factors influencing academic dishonesty. Previous research showed that personal, environmental, and situational factors affect dishonest behaviour at a university. The set of factors and the strength of their influence can differ across countries. There is a lack of research on factors affecting student dishonesty in Russia. A sample of 15,159 undergraduate students from eight Russian highly selective universities was surveyed to understand what factors influence their decision to engage in dishonest behaviour. Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) was employed to explain dishonest behaviour among students. The explained variance in the engagement in academic dishonesty equals 48% in the model for the full sample, and reaches 69% in the model for one of the considered institutions. The major findings of this study were: (1) subjective norms appeared to dominate as the strongest predictor of academic dishonesty across the Russian universities; (2) perceived behavioural control, appeared to be positively related to the dishonest behaviour. In the majority of universities, this factor was found to be insignificant. This finding indicates a specific feature of Russian students’ an ethical decision-making process discussed in the last part of the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20170412181035229

  2. Project 5–100 was launched in 2013 in accordance with the Presidential Decree of the Russian Federation ‘On measures to realize state policy in the sphere of education and science’. Under this project, 21 highly selective Russian universities received financial support to maximize their positions in the global research and education market. The link to the project description: http://5top100.com/.

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (2006). Constructing a theory of planned behaviour questionnaire. Resource document. http://www.unibielefeld.de/ikg/zick/ajzen%20construction%20a%20tpb%20questionnaire.pdf. Accessed 03 April 2017.

  • AL-Dossary, S. A. (2017). Why do College students cheat? A structural equation modeling validation of the theory of planned behavior. International Education Studies, 10(8), 40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alleyne, P., & Phillips, K. (2011). Exploring academic dishonesty among university students in Barbados: An extension to the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9(4), 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altbach, P. (2015). The question of corruption. International Higher Education, 34, 7–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariely, D., & Jones, S. (2012). The (honest) truth about dishonesty: How we lie to everyone – especially ourselves (Vol. 336). New York: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, R., Martin, B. N., & Bigby, L. (2007). Is there a relationship between honor codes and academic dishonesty? Journal of College and Character, 8(2), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagraim, J., Goodman, S., & Pulker, S. (2014). Understanding dishonest academic behaviour amongst business students—The business leaders of the future. Industry and Higher Education, 28(5), 331–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, L., & Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Research in Personality, 25(3), 285–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brimble, M., & Stevenson-Clarke, P. (2005). Perceptions of the prevalence and seriousness of academic dishonesty in Australian universities. Australian Educational Researcher, 32(3), 19–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broeckelman-Post, M. A. (2008). Faculty and student classroom influences on academic dishonesty. IEEE Transactions on Education, 51(2), 206–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camara, S. K., Eng-Ziskin, S., Wimberley, L., Dabbour, K. S., & Lee, C. M. (2017). Predicting students’ intention to plagiarize: An ethical theoretical framework. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(1), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapman, K. J., & Lupton, R. A. (2004). Academic dishonesty in a global educational market: A comparison of Hong Kong and American university business students. International Journal of Educational Management, 18(7), 425–435.

    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(3), 236–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chudzicka-Czupała, A., Grabowski, D., Mello, A. L., Kuntz, J., Zaharia, D. V., Hapon, N., & Börü, D. (2016). Application of the theory of planned behaviour in academic cheating research–cross-cultural comparison. Ethics and Behaviour, 26(8), 638–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochran, J. K. (2017). The effects of life domains, constraints, and motivations on academic dishonesty: A partial test and extension of Agnew’s general theory. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 61(11), 1288–1308.

    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(1), 16–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denisova-Schmidt, E. (2016). Academic dishonesty or corrupt values: The case of Russia. In D. Torsello (Ed.), Corruption in Public Administration: An Ethnographic approach. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

  • Denisova-Schmidt, E. (2017). The challenges of academic integrity in higher education: Current trends and outlook. In CIHE Perspectives (Vol. 5). Boston: Boston College.

  • Denisova-Schmidt, E., Huber, M., & Leontyeva, E. (2016). On the development of students’ attitudes towards corruption and cheating in Russian universities. European Journal of Higher Education, 6(2), 128–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisinga, R., Te Grotenhuis, M., & Pelzer, B. (2013). The reliability of a two-item scale: Pearson, Cronbach, or spearman-Brown? International Journal of Public Health, 58(4), 637–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freiburger, T. L., Romain, D. M., Randol, B. M., & Marcum, C. D. (2017). Cheating behaviors among undergraduate college students: Results from a factorial survey. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 28(2), 222–247.

  • Friedman, A., Blau, I., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2016). Cheating and feeling honest: Committing and punishing analog versus digital academic dishonesty behaviors in higher education. Interdisciplinary Journal of ELearning and Learning Objects, 12(1), 193–205.

  • Froumin I., Platonova D. (2017) Higher education expansion in Brazil, Russia, India, and China. In J. Shin, P. Teixeira (Eds.), Encyclopedia of International Higher Education Systems and Institutions. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Giluk, T. L., & Postlethwaite, B. E. (2015). Big five personality and academic dishonesty: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 59–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golunov, S. (2013), ‘Malpractices in the Russian Higher Education System: Implications for EU-Russian Education and Science Cooperation’, CEURUS EU-Russia Papers, No. 9. Resource document. http://ceurus.ut.ee/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/EU-Russia-Papers-9_Golunov.pdf. Accessed 3 April 2017.

  • Golunov, S. (2014). The elephant in the room: corruption and cheating in Russian universities (Vol. 132). Columbia University Press.

  • Grimes, P. W. (2004). Dishonesty in academics and business: A cross-cultural evaluation of student attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(3), 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurung, R. A. R., Wilhelm, T. M., & Filz, T. (2012). Optimizing honor codes for online exam administration. Ethics and Behavior, 22(2), 158–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, T. S., Mayhew, M. J., Finelli, C. J., & Carpenter, D. D. (2007). The theory of planned behaviour as a model of academic dishonesty in engineering and humanities undergraduates. Ethics and Behaviour, 17(3), 255–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10(3), 301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hox, J. J., & Maas, C. J. (2001). The accuracy of multilevel structural equation modeling with pseudobalanced groups and small samples. Structural Equation Modeling, 8(2), 157–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao, C. H. (2015). Impact of ethical and affective variables on cheating: Comparison of undergraduate students with and without jobs. Higher Education, 69(1), 55–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imran, A. M., & Nordin, M. S. (2013). Predicting the underlying factors of academic dishonesty among undergraduates in public universities: A path analysis approach. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11(2), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ives, B., Alama, M., Mosora, L. C., Mosora, M., Grosu-Radulescu, L., Clinciu, A. I., Cazan, A. M., Badescu, G., Tufis, C., Diaconu, M., & Dutu, A. (2017). Patterns and predictors of academic dishonesty in Romanian university students. Higher Education, 74(5), 815–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeergal, P. A., Surekha, R., Sharma, P., Anila, K., Jeergal, V. A., & Rani, T. (2015). Prevalence, perception and attitude of dental students towards academic dishonesty and ways to overcome cheating behaviors. Journal of Advanced Clinical and Research Insights, 2, 2–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, L. N., Riemenschneider, C. K., & Manly, T. S. (2017). Ethical behavioral intention in an academic setting: Models and predictors. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(2), 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lonsdale, D. (2017). Intentions to cheat: Ajzen's planned behavior and goal-related personality facets. The Journal of Psychology, 151(2), 113–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupton, R. A., & Chaqman, K. J. (2002). Russian and American college students' attitudes, perceptions and tendencies towards cheating. Educational Research, 44(1), 17–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Y., McCabe, D. L., & Liu, R. (2013). Students’ academic cheating in Chinese universities: Prevalence, influencing factors, and proposed action. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11(3), 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnus, J. R., Polterovich, V. M., Danilov, D. L., & Savvateev, A. V. (2002). Tolerance of cheating: An analysis across countries. The Journal of Economic Education, 33(2), 125–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maloshonok, N. (2016). How perceptions of academic honesty at the university correlates with student engagement: Conceptualization and empirical research opportunities. Voprosy Obrazovaniya, 1, 35–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mardia, K. V. (1971). The effect of nonnormality on some multivariate tests and robustness to nonnormality in the linear model. Biometrika, 58(1), 105–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayhew, M. J., Hubbard, S. M., Finelli, C. J., Harding, T. S., & Carpenter, D. D. (2009). Using structural equation modeling to validate the theory of planned behaviour as a model for predicting student cheating. The Review of Higher Education, 32(4), 441–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Treviño, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influence. Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 522–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 38(3), 379–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Dishonesty in academic environments: The influence of peer reporting requirements. Journal of Higher Education, 72(1), 29–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension to modified honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 357–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Trevino, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(3), 294–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Feghali, T., & Abdallah, H. (2008). Academic dishonesty in the Middle East: Individual and contextual factors. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 451–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Megehee, C. M., & Spake, D. F. (2008). The impact of perceived peer behavior, probable detection and punishment severity on student cheating behavior. Marketing Education Review, 18(2), 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, C. L., Othman, J., D’Silva, J. L., & Omar, Z. (2014). Ethical decision making in academic dishonesty with application of modified theory of planned behaviour: A review. International Education Studies, 7(3), 126–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, T. B., & Anderman, E. M. (2006). Motivational perspectives on student cheating: Toward an integrated model of academic dishonesty. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 129–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, T. B., Miller, A. D., & Goetzinger, A. (2007). Effects of classroom context on university students’ judgments about cheating: Mediating and moderating processes. Social Psychology of Education, 10(2), 141–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, B. (1989). Multiple-group structural modelling with non-normal continuous variables. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 42(1), 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, C. (2003). In other (people's) words: Plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(5), 471–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Passow, H. J., Mayhew, M. J., Finelli, C. J., Harding, T. S., & Carpenter, D. D. (2006). Factors influencing engineering students’ decisions to cheat by type of assessment. Research in Higher Education, 47(6), 643–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payan, J., Reardon, J., & McCorkle, D. E. (2010). The effect of culture on the academic honesty of marketing and business students. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(3), 275–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, C. B., & McLaughlin, G. W. (1989). An analysis of predictors of college students’ ethical inclinations. Research in Higher Education, 30(2), 195–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radaev, V. V., & Chirikov, I. S. (2006). Otnoshenie studentov i prepodavatelej k nakazaniyam za plagiat i spisyvanie. Universitetskoe upravlenie praktika i analiz, 4, 77–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajah-Kanagasabai, C. J., & Roberts, L. D. (2015). Predicting self-reported research misconduct and questionable research practices in university students using an augmented theory of planned behaviour. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 535. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rettinger, D. A. (2017). The role of emotions and attitudes in causing and preventing cheating. Theory Into Practice, 56(2), 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rettinger, D. A., & Kramer, Y. (2009). Situational and personal causes of student cheating. Research in Higher Education, 50(3), 293–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roshchina, Ya. M., & Shmeleva, E. D. (2016) Prepodavateli i studenty vuzov obrazovatelnye i trudovye strategii v 2014 g. Informacionnyj byulleten Monitoring ehkonomiki obrazovaniya, 6(95), NRU HSE.

  • Sierles, F., Hendrickx, I., & Circle, S. (1980). Cheating in medical school. Journal of Medical Education, 55, 124–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, C. A., Carr, J. R., McCullough, S. M., Morgan, S. J., Oleson, T., & Ressel, M. (2004). Gender, student perceptions, institutional commitments and academic dishonesty: Who reports in academic dishonesty cases? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(1), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starovoytova, D., & Namango, S. (2016). Factors affecting cheating-behavior at undergraduate-engineering. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(31), 66–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, E. B., & Havlicek, L. (1986). Academic misconduct: Results of faculty and undergraduate student surveys. Journal of Allied Health, 15(2), 129–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T., Jawahar, I., & Kisamore, J. (2009). Using the theory of planned behaviour and cheating justifications to predict academic misconduct. Career Development International, 14(3), 221–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2010). Predicting academic misconduct intentions and behaviour using the theory of planned behaviour and personality. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32(1), 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T. H., Kisamore, J. L., Jawahar, I. M., & Bolin, J. H. (2014). Making our measures match perceptions: Do severity and type matter when assessing academic misconduct offenses? Journal of Academic Ethics, 12(4), 251–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stuhmcke, A., Booth, T., & Wangmann, J. (2016). The illusory dichotomy of plagiarism. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(7), 982–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teodorescu, D., & Andrei, T. (2009). Faculty and peer influences on academic integrity: College cheating in Romania. Higher Education, 57(3), 267–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Montfort, K., Oud, J., & Satorra, A. (Eds.). (2004). Recent developments on structural equation models: Theory and applications (Vol. 19). Springer Science & Business Media.

  • Whitley, B. E. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 235–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic dishonesty: An educator’s guide. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, S. C., Chiang, F. K., & Huang, C. L. (2017). A comparative study of academic dishonesty among university students in mainland China and Taiwan. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(3), 385–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, H., Glanzer, P. L., Sriram, R., Johnson, B. R., & Moore, B. (2016). What сcontributes to college students’ cheating? A study of individual factors. Ethics and Behavior, 27(5), 401–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Yin, H., & Zheng, L. (2018). Investigating academic dishonesty among Chinese undergraduate students: Does gender matter? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 812–826.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Support from the Basic Research Program of the National Research University Higher School of Economics is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Sociology of Higher Education, The Institute of Education, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Natalia Maloshonok & Evgeniia Shmeleva

Authors
  1. Natalia Maloshonok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Evgeniia Shmeleva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalia Maloshonok.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 Correlation matrixes for the total model and each university models
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maloshonok, N., Shmeleva, E. Factors Influencing Academic Dishonesty among Undergraduate Students at Russian Universities. J Acad Ethics 17, 313–329 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-9324-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-9324-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation