Search

Prior to 2009, a mid-sized public institution in the southeast had a faculty-driven honor policy characterized by little education about the policy and no tracking of repeat offenders. An updated code, implemented in August of 2009, required that students sign an honor pledge, created a formal student honor board, and developed a process to track and hold accountable, repeat offenders. Self-reported data on faculty vigilance to detect and punish cheating is collected both prior to and after a change in the honor code at a mid-sized public institution in the southeast. We find that, at the time of the first survey, full professors and faculty with a longer duration of employment were more likely to claim vigilance in cheating detection and harshness in punishing cheaters than newer, untenured faculty. The relationship between these factors and detection and harshness diminished when the honor code was enhanced.

University students' latent attitudes toward capitalism were quantified and used to predict self-reported cheating behaviors. Results suggest that the relationship between student academic dishonesty and attitudes toward capitalism are complex. Students indicating a strong degree of risk aversion are less likely to report cheating behaviors. Students demonstrating a preference for equality over efficiency, while no more likely to be cheaters, may cheat more often. Efficiency-minded students do not appear to be more likely to cheat, but may engage in fewer instances of cheating. Implications for curriculum development in economics and business programs are discussed.

The authors examine student cheating based on implicit and explicit definitions of cheating. Prior to being provided a definition of cheating, students reported whether they had cheated. Students were then provided a definition of cheating and asked to rereport their cheating behaviors. Results indicate that students do not understand what constitutes cheating and are much more likely to report cheating postdefinition. In addition, both pre- and postdefinition cheating behaviors are more prevalent for students with lower GPAs and for those who perceive more cheating by student peers. Alcohol consumption, seeing another student cheat, fraternity/sorority membership, and athletic membership also increase the likelihood of cheating. These findings are consistent with previous studies. On the basis of a sample of students who provided cheating data after a definition of cheating is communicated, the authors find that students who believe that punishment for cheating is relatively severe are less likely to report cheating and that students at institutions with well-publicized honor codes are less likely to admit to cheating compared with students at nonhonor code institutions. (Contains 2 tables and 13 endnotes.)

Abstract Many experts encourage homeowners to improve their houses to better survive natural catastrophes and reduce overall societal costs. However, we find that these encouragements are not necessarily financially sound [...]

This article investigates the propensity for academic dishonesty by university students using the partitioning method of decision tree analysis. A set of prediction rules are presented, and conclusions are drawn. To provide context for the decision tree approach, the partition process is compared with results of more traditional probit regression models. Results of the decision tree analysis complement the probit models in terms of predictive accuracy and confirm results previously found in the literature. In particular, students' moral character--whether they believe cheating is acceptable--is found to be the most important factor in determining the propensity for academic dishonesty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

University students' latent attitudes toward capitalism were quantified and used to predict self-reported cheating behaviors. Results suggest that the relationship between student academic dishonesty and attitudes toward capitalism are complex. Students indicating a strong degree of risk aversion are less likely to report cheating behaviors. Students demonstrating a preference for equality over efficiency, while no more likely to be cheaters, may cheat more often. Efficiency-minded students do not appear to be more likely to cheat, but may engage in fewer instances of cheating. Implications for curriculum development in economics and business programs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]