Search

Academic dishonesty has been an important issue. However, only few researches had been done in Asian countries, especially a nationwide study. A sample of 2,068 college students throughout Taiwan was selected and surveyed on four domains of academic dishonesty, including: cheating on test, cheating on assignment, plagiarism, and falsifying documents. The major findings of this study were: (1) the prevalence rate for all types of dishonesty behaviors among college students in Taiwan was 61.72%; (2) the top five most practiced academic dishonesty behaviors in Taiwan are provided paper or assignment for another student, gave prohibited help to others on their assignment, copied others’ assignments, passed answers to other students, and copied from other students; (3) students’ attitudes correlated with behaviors in all four domains of academic dishonesty; (4) females reported less acceptable to and behaved less academic dishonesty behaviors than males; and (5) freshmen had more dishonest practices than other class ranks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using Reidenbach and Robin's Multidimensional Ethics Scale, this study designs three scenarios related to academic dishonesty (AD) dilemmas to explore students' moral philosophies, behavioral intentions, and ethical judgments and further examines whether students with different individual factors (i.e., culture of place, gender, and educational level) have differences in the above variables. A total of 605 students from two areas, Taiwan and Mainland China, participated in this study. The results indicated that Taiwanese students had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies in the duplicate submission scenario than Mainland China students. They also had stricter moral equity and relativism philosophies in the incomplete citation scenario. Similarly, relatively harsh relativism and contractualism philosophies accompanied by a low level of willingness to be a perpetrator in the failure to cite research published in other countries scenario were found. In addition, females applied relatively harsh moral equity and utilitarianism to all scenarios, reporting that they and their peers were less likely to engage in all AD activities. Graduates had a stricter egoism attitude toward duplicate submission and had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies toward the behavior of incomplete citation. Graduate students also had strict moral equity, relativism, egoism, and contractualism beliefs in the failure to cite the foreign research scenario. Finally, regression analysis showed that moral equity, contractualism, and self-behavioral intention are significant predictors of students' ethical evaluations in the three scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined academic dishonesty (AD) of 586 Taiwanese graduate students, the relationship between students' AD and their perceptions of AD of their peers, and their judgments regarding the seriousness of AD. Results showed that female students were more critical of AD than their male counterparts were in the areas of fraudulence, plagiarism, and falsification. Male students demonstrated more awareness of peer involvement in AD in the area of falsification than did female students. Master's students confessed to greater involvement in AD compared with the PhD students. Doctoral students were more judgmental with respect to unethical acts of fraudulence, plagiarism, and falsification. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Using Reidenbach and Robin's Multidimensional Ethics Scale, this study investigated the relationships between background variables and students' ethical evaluations, judgments, and behavioral intentions using 3 scenarios involving dilemmas related to academic dishonesty. The sample included 436 master's students and 142 doctoral students. The study found that the participants used a combination of ethical philosophies to make ethical decisions. The respondents judged improper citations more harshly than acts of inappropriate authorship or the falsification of data. The doctoral students generally considered behaviors related to plagiarism and falsification to be more unethical than the master's students did, though no gender differences were found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]