ACADEMIC DISHONESTY WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO CHEATING

BEHAVIOR AMONG UNIVERSITY STUDENTS: A MIXED METHOD

Dr. Sushma Lama, Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, Cotton University, Assam

Roshni Jain, MA, Department of Psychology, Cotton University, Assam

In recent years, university students' academic dishonesty has drawn increased attention. The
present study attempts to explore academic dishonesty among 50 men and 50 women who are
pursuing either graduation or post-graduation from universities in India. The Academic
Dishonesty Scale by Hilal Bashir and Ranjan Billa (2018) was used. A t-test revealed
significantly higher academic dishonesty among male students. Thematic analysis was attempted
to generate students’ perceptions about cheating in examinations. It is suggested that different
stakeholders take active steps to lessen the overwhelming feelings of cut-throat competition and
build an encouraging academic environment for the students.

INTRODUCTION

Academic integrity is a foundation that supports the pursuit of knowledge, intellectual growth,
and personal development in higher education. However, recently, academic dishonesty among
university students has gained more attention raising concerns about the values that higher
education institutions uphold.

A general definition for academic dishonesty can be ― “an intentional act of cheating or deceit
while fulfilling academic requirements and/or duties'' (Gitanjali, 2004). Academic dishonesty
encompasses a broad range of unethical behaviors like cheating on exams, buying papers written
by others, over-referencing, plagiarism, lying about content of papers, faking references,
manipulation of staff to name only a few. Research studies and news reports suggest that it is a
widespread problem impacting institutions globally. In a study by the Center for Academic
Integrity at Duke University, which included 50,000 college students and 18,000 high school
students, more than 70% admitted to cheating (McCabe, 2005). This figure has been increased
from 52% in 1993 and 26% in 1963 (McCabe & Trevino, 1993; McCabe & Trevino, 2002;
Vencat E.F. 2006). ‘India’s exams are plagued by cheating’ read a headline in The Economist
(2022). As the examination season begins, facebook groups post messages about getting good
marks in exams through unfair means. As reported in Voice of America (VOA), the largest US
international broadcaster, Indians climbed the wall of a building to help out students taking
exams in Hajipur, Bihar. Also, an article posted on British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in
2023 showed how in India, where government jobs are highly coveted, cases of aspiring
candidates resorting to unfair means are not uncommon. Additionally, education times reported
that in 2021 advanced cheating methods were used that included impersonation in the National
Eligibility-cum-Entrace Test (NEET). Additionally , the systems in the exam center were
hacked from a remote location in the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) Main examination.

Academic dishonesty has repercussions that go beyond simple moral dilemmas. Its influence is
felt by all members of the educational community, including teachers, students, and the integrity
of the school. Academic dishonesty impedes the moral growth of students and denies them the
chance to practice critical thinking, problem-solving, and research techniques. Students who
engage in academic dishonesty may experience severe psychological effects from the guilt,
worry, and stress involved. In business, Karassavidis and Glaveli (2006) reported that cheating
has a positive relation with the attitude towards unethical behavior of the managers.

The study examines academic dishonesty among university students, including the variations in
its 6 dimensions (cheating in examination, plagiarism, outside help, prior cheating, falsification
and lying about academic assignment) looks at gender differences in academic dishonest
behavior, which has been overlooked in the previous studies. Also, few studies could be traced
that have used qualitative approaches to explore cheating behavior during examinations. Through
qualitative analysis, it further explores cheating behavior, exploring its meaning, causes, methods
adopted, and its effect.

METHOD

The study used a mixed method approach to understand the dynamics of academic dishonesty.
For quantitative analysis, the selected sample, using convenience sampling, was 50 men and 50
women who were pursuing either graduation or post-graduation from universities in India. The
tool used was Academic Dishonesty Scale by Hilal Bashir and Ranjan Billa (2018). There were a
total of 23 statements. The scale comprises 5-point Likert format, each statement was rated on
five sequential points, (always=5, frequently=4, sometimes=3, rarely=2 and never= 1. High score
on the measure denotes a higher level of involvement of students in academic dishonesty. For
this scale Cronbach’s alpha indicated good internal reliability (α= .831). The construct reliability
(CR) of academic dishonesty scale stands at 0.70 (Hair et al. 2010). The scale was converted
into Google form and was distributed using social media platforms among university students. t-
test was used to find out the gender difference in academic dishonesty through SPSS. Moreover,
ANOVA was used to find out the overall difference between the dimensions among university
students. For qualitative analysis, purposive sampling was used to select 10 students who had
been expelled because of using unfair means while writing their examinations. In-depth
interviews with the selected participants were conducted using a self-prepared semi-structured
interview guide. The interview was conducted face to face in a well-lit environment. For those
who were unavailable physically, an online interview was scheduled through Google meet.
Thematic analysis by Braun and Clarke was used to generate themes.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results obtained revealed the value of t as 5.037 which was statistically significant at 0.01
indicating that there exists a significant difference between male and female . The mean score for
male was higher i.e 45.68 as compared to female i.e 35.94 indicating that men significantly
engaged more in academic dishonesty as compared to women. Gender difference among the 5
dimensions of academic dishonesty i.e Cheating in Examinations, Plagiarism, Outside help, Prior
Cheating, Falsification, Lying about Academic Assignments was assessed. For all the
dimensions, male participants had high mean scores as compared to female participants. The t-
value for cheating in examination was 4.23, for plagiarism is 3.006, for outside help is 2.107, for
prior cheating is 3.878, for falsification is 3.751 and for lying about academic assignment is
4.088. All the dimensions are highly significant at 0.001 level apart from outside help which was
statistically significant at 0.05 level, indicating significant gender difference among the
dimensions of academic dishonesty. Pre-1990s research (e.g., Eisen, 1972) revealed gender
differences indicating that men showed significantly higher levels of academic dishonesty than
women. Ward and Beck (1990) proposed that this difference is due to women's tendency to obey
social rules. When Whitley and Keith-Spiegel (2002) looked at the prevalence of academic
dishonesty among college students, they found that men were more likely than women to cheat
academically. They proposed that the distinction could be caused by socialisation processes and
conventional gender standards. Also, it's likely that men take risks more frequently than women
do. This could be the result of societal pressures like peer pressure or the need for thrills.
(Pawlowski & Rajinder, 2008). Rettinger and Jordan (2005) conducted research on the
correlation between gender, academic achievement, and cheating behaviour and found that when
men felt pressured to maintain a specific GPA or observed a strong value placed on academics,
they were more likely to cheat. Men are more affected by external factors like competition and
expectations for academic success. Compared to women, men are much more likely to engage in
scientific misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism. (Kaatz, Vogelmen and
Carnes 2013)

In addition to the t-test, ANOVA was conducted to test the group means in different dimensions
of academic dishonesty. The F value for between groups was found to be 68.406. (p < 0.001),
indicating that students varied significantly in the six different dimensions of academic
dishonesty.

An in-depth interview was also conducted with students who were caught red-handed while
cheating in exams using interview methods. The text was analyzed using thematic analysis
informed by Clarke and Braun (2006). The analysis revealed the following emerging themes:

Cheating is wrong but yields results in a competitive world - For few students cheating was
morally wrong while for others it was beneficial for eg. ‘’ I feel cheating for me is good if it is
benefiting me ‘’; ‘’Cheating is the road to success for me…without it I will not be able to get
good marks’’. Perhaps, students experience pressure to get "good marks" at any costs. There is
more pressure and urgency because of the fierce competition among students to perform better
than their peers and earn the best grades. The fear of falling behind or not living up to
expectations becomes a powerful incentive for dishonest behaviour in this high-stakes
environment. It's possible for students to feel pressured to cheat in order to have an advantage
and succeed academically. In addition, pressure to cheat is increased by the idea that future
prospects and results are contingent upon academic achievement. A mindset where academic
achievement takes precedence over real learning and personal development is sometimes
fostered by the drive to merely obtain good grades. Students may become so focused on
achieving high marks that they prioritise short-term gains above long-term growth. People's
ethical judgement may be compromised and their integrity may be compromised by the pressure
to achieve in a competitive setting.

Internal psychological and poor monitoring mechanisms serve as factors behind cheating -
This theme was subdivided into internal and external factors. The internal factors included low
self-efficacy for instance ‘’ I might fail in exams if I don’t cheat in exams’’ and low self-esteem
for eg, ‘’ I am not smart and intelligent like my other classmates’’. According to a 2015 study by
David Teodara, students who feel high mastery and highly self-esteem cheat less. This means
that students who value themselves and feel in control of their actions are more likely to believe
that their actions will determine the outcome of their actions, which reduces the amount of
inappropriate behaviour. In a materialistic society or among peers, social comparisons might
persuade students to cheat. ‘’ My father wants me to earn as well as study because we are not
rich and therefore I have to cheat’’, ‘’ My sister is very good in studies so my father tells me to
score good marks like her, else I will never be successful’’. External factors included poor
controlling environment, ‘’ There are no strict rules and regulations in our hostel and no
supervision… I myself went to my hostel during my examination to take a few study materials
and came back to give exams’’. Invigilators unknowingly contribute to a society that accepts, if
not normalises, academic dishonesty by refusing to confront incidences of cheating. Students
receive the message that cheating is normal, and this could encourage others to do the same.
Academic fairness and integrity are compromised when cheating is allowed. It erodes confidence
in the educational system and minimizes the efforts of sincere students who put in a lot of effort
to meet their academic goals. Three participants claimed that since they used to spend most of
the time drinking alcohol, they barely had time to study which led them to cheat in examinations.
For instance, ‘’ I was so into alcohol with my friends that I didn’t have time to study or
concentrate on studies’.... My priority was alcohol ’. Studies show that undergraduates run mad
at the course of their academic sojourn and some even suffer memory loss due to drinking
thereby finding it hard to graduate ( Bichler et al., 2003). In another study Alcohol abuse or
dependence was identified in 501 (14%) students; of these, 128 (3.6%) were alcohol-dependent.
Of the students who met criteria of alcohol dependence, 62.5% failed in their first year,
compared to 50% among students who did not report these drinking problems. ( Aertgeerts &
Buntinx, 2002 )
Cheating goes hi-tech - 3 out of 10 students have resorted to cheating through mini xerox and
technical gadgets., whereas 4 of them resorted to using chits and pre-written methods. Students
said that ‘’ One day before the exams I did mini xerox from a local xerox shop...This mini xerox
was helpful as the entire chapter would fit in just 1-2 paper.’’ 2 students stated that they found
technical gadgets such as smartphones, smartwatches , bluetooth earphones more feasible than
cheats as it was very easy for them to collect information from technical gadgets.

Effect experienced when caught cheating in examination- Several sub themes emerged from
this theme which was grouped into two categories Physical effects and Psychological Effects. All
the ten students had similar responses to when they were caught cheating. The response included
an abrupt rise in heart rate, for eg- ‘’ When I was caught by my teacher my face became red and I
was shaking out of fear’’ ; palpitations, excessive sweating. All participants reported trembling
violently when caught cheating, with their hands shaking uncontrollably, for eg. ‘’ As soon as
the invigilator approached me, I felt my whole body start trembling. Apart from the physical
effect students also experienced psychological effects: an intense mixture of shame ‘’ I mostly
didn’t talk with anyone for a few days as I was embarrassed by my behaviour’’, negative self-
perception ‘’ I lost confidence after being exposed as a cheater. I questioned my skills and was
concerned that people would view me as someone who constantly took the easy way out’’ and
social withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, we see that men showed significantly higher levels of academic dishonesty than
women. Men also showed significantly higher scores in each of the six dimensions of academic
dishonesty (cheating in examination, plagiarism, outside help, prior cheating, falsification and
lying about academic assignment). Further, students varied significantly in the six different
dimensions of academic dishonesty. This study has several important implications, one of which
is the need for tailored approaches and instructional strategies to address the particular
challenges that male students face in developing academic integrity. Interventions could include
awareness campaigns among the students, guardians, teachers and administration, that highlight
the pressures that students feel due to a sense of cut-throat competition and constant comparisons
from their parents, workshops to build self-efficacy, and time management skills for students.
The University may take measures to improve invigilation mechanisms thereby creating better
invigilation experiences. The values of honesty and integrity, as well as the serious consequences
of academic dishonesty, should be emphasised by educators from time to time. In future, a
longitudinal design that follows participants over time would provide insights into the stability
and fluctuations in cheating behavior.

ENDNOTES

Aertgeerts, B., & Buntinx, F. (2002). The relation between alcohol abuse or dependence and
academic performance in first-year college students. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 31(3), 223–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1054-139x(02)00362-

Bashir, H., & Bala, R. (2018). Development and Validation of Academic Dishonesty Scale
(ADS): Presenting a Multidimensional Scale. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2),
57–74. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1125a

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic Analysis : A Practical Guide. Sage Publications.

Bichler, G., & Tibbetts, S. G. (2003). Conditional Covariation of Binge Drinking with Predictors
of College Students’ Cheating. Psychological Reports, 93(3), 735–749.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2003.93.3.735

David, L. T. (2015). Academic Cheating in College Students: Relations among Personal Values,
Self-esteem and Mastery. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 187, 88–92.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.017

‌ Eisen, M. (1972). Characteristic self-esteem, sex, and resistance to temptation. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 24, 68–72. doi: 10.1037/h0033387
Gitanjali, B. (2004). Academic dishonesty in Indian medical colleges. Journal of Postgraduate
Medicine, 50(4), 281–284.
https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/3980/1/jp04097.pdf

Hair, Jr, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data
analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education International

‌Hundreds of Students Caught Cheating in India. (n.d). (2015, March 20). Voice of America.
https://www.voanews.com/a/hundreds-of-students-caught-cheating-in-india/
2688069.html

‌India’s exams are plagued by cheating. (n.d). (2022, May 26th). The Economist.
https://www.economist.com/asia/2022/05/26/indias-exams-are-plagued-by-cheating

Kaatz, A., Vogelman, P. N., & Carnes, M. (2013). Are Men More Likely than Women To
Commit Scientific Misconduct? Maybe, Maybe Not. MBio, 4(2).
https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.00156-13

‌Karassavidou, E., & Glaveli, N. (2006). Towards the ethical or the unethical side? International
Journal of Educational Management, 20(5), 348–364.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540610676421

McCabe, D. L. (2005). Cheating among college and university students: A North American
perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 1(1).
https://doi.org/10.21913/ijei.v1i1.14

McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1993). Academic Dishonesty: Honor Codes and Other
Contextual Influences. Journal of Higher Education, 64(5), 522–538.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ469064

McCabe, D. L., Treviño, 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.
https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014893102151
‌Muñoz García, A., Gil-Gómez de Liaño, B., & Pascual-Ezama, D. (2021). Gender Differences in
Individual Dishonesty Profiles. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.728115

Pawlowski, B., Atwal, R., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2008). Sex Differences in Everyday Risk-Taking
Behavior in Humans. Evolutionary Psychology, 6(1), 147470490800600.
https://doi.org/10.1177/147470490800600104

Pulvers, K., & Diekhoff, G. M. (1999). The Relationship between Academic Dishonesty and
College Classroom Environment. Research in Higher Education, 40(4), 487–498.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40196358

Rettinger, D. A., & Kramer, Y. (2008). Situational and Personal Causes of Student Cheating.
Research in Higher Education, 50(3), 293–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-
9116-5

Srivastava‌, N. (2023, February 8). India paper leaks: Cheating plagues India jobs coveted by
millions. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-64495673

Srivastava, S. (2022, September 01). ‌Application-based questions can reduce cheating in

exams. EducationTimes.com. . https://www.educationtimes.com/article/campus-beat-
college-life/93929882/application-based-questions-can-reduce-cheating-in-exams

Stromberg, J. (2013, January 23). Men Commit Scientific Fraud Much More Frequently

Than Women. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/men-

commit-scientific-fraud-much-more-frequently-than-women-

‌Vencat, E. F. (2006, March 26). The Perfect Score. Newsweek..

https://www.newsweek.com/perfect-score-106425

Ward, D. A., and Beck, W. L. (1990). Gender and dishonesty. J. Soc. Psychol. 130, 333–339.
doi: 10.1080/00224545.1990.9924589

Whitley, Jr., B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2001). Academic Dishonesty. Psychology Press.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604279