首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Academic Ethics >Forced-Choice Personality Measures and Academic Dishonesty: a Comparative Study
【24h】

Forced-Choice Personality Measures and Academic Dishonesty: a Comparative Study

机译:强迫选择人格测度与学术不诚实的比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Extant research (e.g., Wilks et al. 2016; Williams et al. 2010) has shown personality to be a predictor of engagement in academic dishonesty. The current study seeks to determine whether the type of personality measure affects predictive efficacy by comparing single stimulus and forced-choice measures of personality using a sample of 278 undergraduate students in two U.S. universities. Students scoring high on conscientiousness reported as engaging in fewer academic cheating behaviors than those scoring low on conscientiousness regardless of whether conscientiousness was measured using the forced-choice or single stimulus scale format. In addition, the forced-choice and single stimulus measures each contributed significant unique variance to prediction of academic dishonesty. For agreeable-ness, scores on the single stimulus measure were negatively correlated with academic dishonesty whereas there was a positive relationship found for the forced-choice measure. Overall, the forced-choice format of the Occupational Personality Questionnaire 32r (OPQ32r) did not show higher validities than the single stimulus IPIP counterpart in predicting self-reported academic dishonesty. Implications for future research and management education are discussed.
机译:现有的研究(例如Wilks等人2016; Williams等人2010)表明人格是参与学术不诚实行为的预测指标。本研究旨在通过对美国两所大学278名本科生的样本进行比较,比较单一刺激和强迫选择人格措施,从而确定人格措施的类型是否会影响预测效果。不论是否使用强制选择或单一刺激量表来衡量认真度,得分高的学生所从事的学术作弊行为要少于得分低的学生。此外,强制选择和单一刺激措施各自为预测学术不诚实贡献了显着的独特差异。为使人满意,单一刺激措施的得分与学术不诚实程度呈负相关,而强迫选择措施则呈正相关。总体而言,在预测自我报告的学术不诚实方面,职业性格问卷32r(OPQ32r)的强制选择格式没有显示出比单一激励IPIP对等方更高的有效性。讨论了对未来研究和管理教育的意义。

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