Skip to main content

Academic Integrity in Social Sciences

  • 479 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on academic integrity in social sciences with an emphasis on university teaching and learning processes. There is a substantial body of work on integrity among business students and students in behavioral sciences. These constitute the main foci of this chapter. The chapter synthesizes the literature in these areas and identifies practices through which academic integrity has been promoted in social sciences. While much of the existing literature focuses on negative aspects, that is, dishonesty, cheating, and the lack of integrity, some literature on teaching and learning provides evidence of aspects that promote academic integrity in social sciences. These include formal ethics and integrity education, integrated ethics content, early exposure to ethics content, and a focus on trainers and senior academics, as well as the community, integrity policy, and research practices. Some features in the different fields of social sciences may bring about specific integrity challenges. Where pertinent, such features are discussed. For instance, conventions and practices in thesis supervision may differ markedly among fields, creating specific challenges. Possible caveats for integrity are identified and discussed.

Keywords

  • Unethical Behavior
  • Business Student
  • Academic Integrity
  • Cheat Behavior
  • Teaching Teaching

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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

References

  • Anderson, M. S., & Louis, K. S. (1994). The graduate student experience and subscription to the norms of science. Research in Higher Education, 35, 273–299.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, M. S., Horn, A. S., Risbey, K. R., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior? Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine, 82, 853–860.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, R., & Cox, A. L. (2005). ‘At least they are learning something’: The hazy line between collaboration and collusion. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30, 107–122.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Beauvais, L. L., Desplaces, D. E., Melchar, D. E., & Bosco, S. M. (2007). Business faculty perceptions and actions regarding ethics education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 5, 121–136.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, R. A., Lecca, C. L., Murphy, J. C., & Sturgis, E. M. (2011). Does education influence ethical decisions? An international study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9, 235–256.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Branstetter, S. A., & Handelsman, M. M. (2000). Graduate teaching assistants: Ethical training, beliefs, and practices. Ethics & Behavior, 10, 27–50.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bretag, T., Mahmud, S., Wallace, M., Walker, R., McGowan, U., East, J., Green, M., Partridge, L., & James, C. (2014). ‘Teach us how to do it properly!’ An Australian academic integrity student survey. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 1150–1169.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. S. (1995). The academic ethics of graduate business students: A survey. Journal of Education for Business, 70, 151–156.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, V. J., & Howell, M. E. (2001). The efficacy of policy statements on plagiarism: Do they change students’ views? Research in Higher Education, 42, 103–118.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bryan, L. D., Yahr, M. A., & Schimmel, K. (2009). Perceptions of college and university codes of ethics. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 2, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield, K. D., Treviño, L. K., & Weaver, G. R. (2000). Moral awareness in business organizations: Influence of issue-related and social context factors. Human Relations, 53, 981–1018.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Canary, H. E. (2007). Teaching ethics in communication courses: An investigation of instructional methods, course foci, and student outcomes. Communication Education, 56, 193–208.

    CrossRef  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 friend. Journal of Marketing Education, 26, 236–249.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, M. E., & Amodeo, M. (2005). Responding to plagiarism in schools of social work: Considerations and recommendations. Journal of Social Work Education, 41, 527–543.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Delamont, S., Atkinson, P., & Parry, O. (2000). The doctoral experience. Success and failure in graduate school. London: Falmer Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Drisko, J. W. (1997). Strengthening qualitative studies and reports: Standards to promote academic integrity. Journal of Social Work Education, 33, 185–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • East, J., & Donnelly, L. (2012). Taking responsibility for academic integrity: A collaborative teaching and learning design. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 9. http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol9/iss3/2. Accessed 20 June 2013.

  • Fanelli, D. (2010). Do pressure to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US States data. PLoS One, 5, e10271. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010271.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fanelli, D. (2013). Only reporting guidelines can save (soft) sciences. European Journal of Personality, 27, 124–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrell, C. M., & Daniel, L. G. (1995). A frame of reference for understanding behaviors related to the academic misconduct of undergraduate teacher education students. Research in Higher Education, 36, 345–375.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, C. B., & Kuther, T. L. (1997). Integrating research ethics into the introductory psychology course curriculum. Teaching of Psychology, 24, 172–175.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fly, B. J., van Bark, W. P., Weinman, L., Kitchener, K. S., & Lang, P. R. (1997). Ethical transgressions of psychology graduate students: Critical incidents with implications for training. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28, 492–495.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, T., Siegel, P., Sohar, J. S., & Sirgy, J. (2008). A survey of management educators’ perceptions of unethical faculty behavior. Journal of Academic Ethics, 6, 129–152.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, A. S., & Malhotra, N. (2008). Publication bias in empirical sociological research: Do arbitrary significance levels distort published results? Sociological Methods and Research, 37, 3–30.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Godecharle, S., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2013). Guidance on research integrity: No union in Europe. Lancet, 381, 1097–1098 + Appendix 6 pages.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hakala, J. (2009). Socialization of junior researchers in new academic research environments: Two case studies from Finland. Studies in Higher Education, 34, 501–516.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, D. L., Rupert, P. A., Ross, S. A., & Shapera, W. E. (1999). Student perceptions of dual relationships between faculty and students. Ethics & Behavior, 9, 79–106.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, S. R. (2013). Conceptual clarification and the task of improving research on academic ethics. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11, 243–256.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, L. A., & Kent, J. (2008). Integrity at a distance: A study of academic misconduct among university students on and off campus. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 17(Suppl), S3–S16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kidwell, L. A., & Kidwell, R. E. (2008). Do the numbers add up to different views? Perceptions of ethical faculty behavior among faculty in quantitative versus qualitative disciplines. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 141–151.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K. S. (1992). Psychologist as teacher and mentor: Affirming ethical values throughout the curriculum. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23, 190–195.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Klemke, E. D., Hollinger, R., & Kline, A. D. (Eds.). (1980). Introductory readings in the philosophy of science. New York: Prometheus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laband, D. N., & Piette, M. J. (2000). Perceived conduct and professional ethics among college economics faculty. American Economist, 44, 24–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löfström, E. (2012). Students’ ethical awareness and conceptions of research ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 22, 349–361.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Löfström, E., & Pyhältö, K. (2014). Ethical issues in doctoral supervision – The perspectives of PhD students in the natural and behavioural sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 24, 195–214.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Löfström, E., Trotman, T., Furnari, M., & Shephard, K. (2015). Who teaches academic integrity and how do they do it? Higher Education, 69(3), 435–448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupton, R. A., Chapman, K. J., & Weiss, J. E. (2000). A cross-national exploration of business students’ attitudes, perceptions, and tendencies toward academic dishonesty. Journal of Education for Business, 75, 231–235.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Macfarlane, B., Zhang, J., & Pun, A. (2014). Academic integrity: A review of the literature. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 339–358.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435, 737–738.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., & Treviño, L. K. (1995). Cheating among business students: A challenge for business leaders and educators. Journal of Management Education, 19, 205–218.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mirshekary, S., Yaftian, A. M., & Mir, M. Z. (2010). Students’ perceptions of academic and business dishonesty: Australian evidence. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8, 67–84.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Necker, S. (2014). Scientific misbehavior in economics. Research Policy, 43, 1747–1759.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nonis, S., & Swift, C. O. (2001). An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Journal of Education for Business, 77, 69–77.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, C., & Cotter, D. (2000). The ethics of final year accountancy students: An international comparison. Managerial Auditing Journal, 15, 108–115.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, S. L. (2000). Challenges for research ethics and moral knowledge construction in the applied social sciences. Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 307–318.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rissanen, M., & Löfström, E. (2014). Students’ research ethics competences and the university as a learning environment. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 10(2), 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robie, C., & Keeping, L. M. (2005). Perceptions of ethical behavior among business faculty in Canada. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2, 221–247.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Robie, C., & Kidwell, R. E. (2003). The ‘ethical’ professor and the undergraduate student: Current perceptions of moral behavior among business school faculty. Journal of Academic Ethics, 1, 153–173.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, M. R., & Fischer, K. (1998). Do authorship policies impact students’ judgments of perceived wrongdoing? Ethics & Behavior, 8, 59–79.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Royal, K. D., Parrent, J. V., & Clark, R. P. (2011). Measuring education majors’ perceptions of academic misconduct: An item response theory perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 7(1), 18–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segal, L., Gideon, L., & Haberfeld, M. R. (2011). Comparing the ethical attitudes of business and criminal justice students. Social Science Quarterly, 92, 1021–1043.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smyth, L. M., & Davis, J. R. (2004). Perceptions of dishonesty among two-year college students: Academic versus business situations. Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 63–73.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R. E., Harris, O. J., & Williamson, S. (1993). A comparison of ethical evaluations of business school faculty and students: A pilot study. Journal of Business Ethics, 12, 611–619.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, A., & Taylor, D. (2011). Confusion about collusion: Working together and academic integrity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36, 831–841.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. C. C., & Rocha, M. F. O. (2010). Academic misconduct in Portugal: Results from a large scale survey to university economics/business students. Journal of Academic Ethics, 8, 21–41.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tryon, G. S. (2000). Ethical transgressions of school psychology graduate students: A critical incidents survey. Ethics & Behavior, 10, 271–279.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Zucchero, R. A. (2008). Can psychology ethics be integrated into introductory psychology? Journal of Academic Ethics, 6, 245–257.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erika Löfström .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this entry

Cite this entry

Löfström, E. (2015). Academic Integrity in Social Sciences. In: Bretag, T. (eds) Handbook of Academic Integrity. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_47-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-079-7_47-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-287-079-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social Sciences