首页> 外文期刊>Interdisciplinary Journal of e-Skills and Lifelong Learning >Cheating and Feeling Honest: Committing and Punishing Analog versus Digital Academic Dishonesty Behaviors in Higher Education
【24h】

Cheating and Feeling Honest: Committing and Punishing Analog versus Digital Academic Dishonesty Behaviors in Higher Education

机译:作弊和诚实:在高等教育中对模拟和数字学术不诚实行为的承诺和惩罚

获取原文
       

摘要

This study examined the phenomenon of academic dishonesty among university students. It was based on Pavela’s (1997) framework of types of academic dishonesty (cheating, plagiarism, fabrication, and facilitation) and distinguished between digital and “traditional”- analog dishonesty. The study analyzed cases of academic dishonesty offenses committed by students, as well as the reasons for academic dishonesty behaviors, and the severity of penalties for violations of academic integrity. The motivational framework for committing an act of academic dishonesty (Murdock & Anderman, 2006) and the Self-Concept Maintenance model (Mazar, Amir, & Ariely, 2008) were employed to analyze the reasons for students’ dishonest behaviors. We analyzed 315 protocols of the Disciplinary Committee, at The Open University of Israel, from 2012-2013 that represent all of the offenses examined by the Committee during one and a half years. The findings showed that analog dishonesty was more prevalent than digital dishonesty. According to the students, the most prevalent reason for their academic dishonesty was the need to maintain a positive view of self as an honest person despite violating ethical codes. Interestingly, penalties for analog dishonesty were found to be more severe than those imposed for digital dishonesty. Surprisingly, women were penalized more severely than men, despite no significant gender differences in dishonesty types or in any other parameter explored in the study. Findings of this study shed light on the scope and roots of academic dishonesty and may assist institutions in coping effectively with this phenomenon.
机译:本研究考察了大学生的学术不诚实现象。它基于Pavela(1997)的学术不诚实类型(作弊,窃,捏造和协助)框架,并区分了数字和“传统”-模拟不诚实。该研究分析了学生犯下的学术不诚实罪案件,学术不诚实行为的原因以及违反学术诚信行为的严厉程度。采取学术不诚实行为的动机框架(Murdock和Anderman,2006年)和自我维持概念模型(Mazar,Amir和Ariely,2008年)来分析学生不诚实行为的原因。我们对2012-2013年以色列公开大学纪律委员会的315项协议进行了分析,这些协议代表了委员会在一年半内审查的所有违法行为。研究结果表明,模拟不诚实比数字不诚实更为普遍。根据学生的说法,他们学术不诚实的最普遍原因是尽管他们违反了道德准则,但仍需要保持对自己作为诚实人的积极看法。有趣的是,发现对模拟不诚实的处罚比对数字不诚实的处罚更为严厉。令人惊讶的是,尽管在不诚实类型或研究中探讨的任何其他参数上没有显着的性别差异,但妇女比男子受到的惩罚更重。这项研究的结果揭示了学术不诚实的范围和根源,可能有助于机构有效地应对这一现象。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号