Understanding Contextual Influences on Undergraduate Students' Decisions about Academic Cheating
Open Access
- Author:
- Quaye, Brenda R
- Graduate Program:
- Higher Education
- Degree:
- Doctor of Philosophy
- Document Type:
- Dissertation
- Date of Defense:
- May 24, 2010
- Committee Members:
- Robert Reason, Dissertation Advisor/Co-Advisor
Robert D Reason, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Robert M Hendrickson, Committee Chair/Co-Chair
Lisa R Lattuca, Committee Member
Duane Francis Alwin, Committee Member - Keywords:
- academic integrity
cheating
academic dishonesty
college students - Abstract:
- Academic cheating is pervasive on college campuses. Researchers have studied prevalence of cheating, factors related to cheating, and characteristics of cheaters. However, little is known about why students cheat. The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of how students think about cheating and to build theory about what influences students’ decisions about cheating. Constructive grounded theory methodology and qualitative methods were used to explore students’ understanding of, experiences with, and influences on cheating. Group and individual interviews were conducted with 42 participants. The group interviews focused on how students defined and understood cheating. The individual interviews focused on students’ personal experiences with cheating. The research findings indicate that students have unclear definitions of cheating and experience little discussion about or prevention of cheating in courses. However, students look to faculty members to explain and prevent cheating. A Theory of Contextual Influences on Students’ Decision-Making about Cheating emerged from the data. Most students have an anti-cheating general attitude about cheating. Students also are influenced not to cheat by non-contextual influences: (1) academic self-efficacy, (2) value of education, (3) adherence to societal and group norms, and (4) personal character and responsibility. However, in particular situations, contextual influences either support or override the anti-cheating influences. The contextual influences are (1) classroom context (including class size, prevention measures and fear of consequences, perceptions of faculty demeanor and teaching, relationship with faculty, relevance or understanding of material or subject, type of assignment, and peer behavior and trust), (2) grade pressure, (3) time constraints and personal life circumstances, and (4) personal definition of cheating. If the contextual influences create an environment in which cheating is deemed acceptable, students adopt a temporary, pro-cheating attitude and act on that attitude. The findings from this research inform the practice of educators and administrators in their efforts to educate about and prevent cheating. The findings suggest that changes to practices in the classroom might curb cheating. Additionally the findings point to the need for more education about the issue of cheating. Finally, future directions for further research on college student cheating are proposed.