How surveillance begets perceptions of dishonesty: the case of the counterfactual sinner

Three studies support the hypothesis that observers' impressions of actors reflect not only what actors do but also what they can easily be imagined doing. Participants in Studies 1 and 2 observed a 10-year-old boy take a math test in a context in which the incentive to cheat and the constraints against cheating varied. When the incentive to cheat was high but the likelihood of getting caught was also high, observers perceived a target who resisted the temptation to cheat as less honest than the average boy. This effect was not found when the incentive to cheat was low, which suggests that its occurrence under high temptation resulted from observers in that condition generating the counterfactual thought that the target would have cheated had the likelihood of detection been low. Study 3 further supported the link between spontaneous counterfactual thought and inferences of dishonesty. The implications of the counterfactual correspondence bias are discussed.     

The cheating and intention of a partner as determinants of evaluative decisions among juvenile offenders

Male juvenile offenders were asked to evaluate the work of an experimental partner (confederate) who completed a work task four times. The work partner cheated on two trials and did not cheat on two trials while working for a charity (one cheat and one noncheat trial) or for selfish gain (one cheat and one noncheat trial). It was found that subjects rated the work done on cheating trials lower than work done on noncheating trials. In addition, subjects shared less reward money on cheating trials relative to noncheating trials. However, the intentions of the confederate, defined as the reward recipient, failed to affect subjects' judgments. These results were described as supporting previous studies which have indicated that delinquents fail to take account of others' intentions when making moral judgments.     

Machiavellianism and spontaneous cheating in competition

Seventy-two undergraduates were assigned to groups defined by the combinations of the factors opportunity to cheat (yes, no), type of competition (personal, impersonal), and subject Machiavellianism (high, low). As predicted, cheating occurred in the opportunity to cheat, impersonal competition, high Mach group and in the opportunity to cheat, personal competition, low Mach group, extending the results of previous Machiavellianism research from situations in which cheating was explicitly encouraged by another person to a situation in which cheating was undertaken at the subject's own initiative.     

Experimental Assessment of Cheating Prevalence in the Czech Republic as an Example of a Post-Communist Country

Dishonest behavior presents a serious problem in many countries’ institutions and was found to be relatively widespread in post-communist countries. We focus on the prevalence of cheating in a sample from such country, the Czech Republic, and individual characteristics influencing dishonest behavior. We used a die rolling task where participants can cheat on their reward to determine whether anonymity conditions increase the frequency of cheating. Participants playing alone did not cheat significantly more than the control group throwing dice publicly. We did not find that gender, cognitive abilities, risk and social preferences robustly predicted the rate of cheating.     

Gender differences in students’ rational decisions to cheat

Few rational choice studies of deviant behavior have reported statistical tests of difference in the effects of explanatory variables between men and women. Using scenario‐based survey data from a sample of 330 university students (171 women and 159 men), this study examined gender differences in levels and effects of explanatory variables on intentions to cheat on exams. Findings showed significant gender differences in mean scores of low self‐control, anticipated shame states, perceived external sanctions, grade point average, and reported test‐cheating intentions. Regression analyses showed that the effects of moral beliefs and perceived pleasure of cheating were significantly more pronounced in predicting women's cheating intentions, whereas men were more affected by prior cheating experiences and friends’ cheating behavior. Findings also indicated that anticipated shame states accounted for the association between gender and cheating intentions. These results are consistent with recent studies dealing with gender‐related developmental differences regarding deviant propensities.     

Armstrong was a Cheat: A Reply to Eric Moore

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we reply to Eric Moore’s argument that Lance Armstrong did not cheat, at least according to one, standard account of cheating. If that is the case, we argue, so much the worse for the standard account of cheating, since Armstrong was a cheat. We argue that the standard account of cheating fails on several counts: it specifies conditions that are not necessary for cheating: that cheating involves trying to secure an unfair advantage and that cheating depends on fair application of the rules. We dispute Moore’s claim that doping in the peloton was a convention that had normative force, and reject his anti-formalist analogy between doping in the peloton and bodily contact in basketball.     

Do Birds of a Feather Cheat Together? How Personality and Relationships Affect Student Cheating

Academic misconduct is widespread in schools, colleges, and universities and it appears to be an international phenomenon that also spills over into the workplace (Nonis and Swift 2001; Sims 1993; Stone et al. 2011). To this end, while a great deal of research has investigated various individual components such as, demographic, personality and situational factors that contribute to cheating, research has yet to examine why students help others cheat and which students are being asked to help others cheat. In this study, we investigated if the closeness of the relationship to the individual requesting help in cheating to the individual being asked to help cheat, influenced the decision to help cheat. We also investigated if past cheating behavior predicted how an individual would respond to requests to cheat. Additionally, we sought to answer the following questions; whether minor cheating is more prevalent than serious cheating, what personality factors predict helping others cheat, who is helped, and how people rationalize helping others cheat. Results indicate minor cheating to be more prevalent, prudent personalities are less likely to have cheated or to help others cheat, individuals are more likely to help friends cheat than to help strangers, and past cheating behaviors is indicative of helping others to cheat. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Cheating,intention, and punishment from an equity theory perspective

Male college students were given the opportunity to deliver aversive noise to a partner (confederate) contingent on the partner's “mistakes” in a learning task. Subjects were either not informed about a reward or told that they, their partner, or a charity would receive a monetary reward for speedy learning. Half of the subjects observed the confederate cheat, while half did not observe any deceptive behavior. The intensity of punitive behavior seemed to vary in accordance with predictions derived from equity theory. That is, cheating for a charity, a “good cause” resulted in less intense punishment than did cheating for selfish gain. On the other hand, mistakes, uncomplicated by cheating, which deprived a charity were punished more intensely than were mistakes whose only result accrued to the confederate himself.     

The Impact of Professional Unethical Beliefs on Cheating Intention

The phenomenon of academic dishonesty among college students is prevalent, but its damage cannot be underestimated because the students' decisions to cheat were related to decisions to engage in similar unethical behavior in the workplace after graduation. To examine the influential factors of the cheating intention among part-time students with several years of work experience, we included an additional variable—unethical beliefs related to the workplace (professional unethical beliefs) into the theory of planned behavior. First-year business students on the job were investigated from a university in northern Taiwan, resulting in a valid sample of 215 students. Our findings indicate that perceived behavioral control toward cheating and professional unethical beliefs have a greater impact on the intention to cheat. In addition, the subjective norm and attitudes also affect the students' cheating intention. Implications for managers and researchers are discussed, and suggestions for future research are offered.     

The relationship between cheating behavior and sensation-seeking

Academic dishonesty is a problem in academia and cheating is a problem in society at large. Sensation-seeking was proposed as a personality trait that is positively related to one’s likelihood to cheat. A sample of 105 undergraduates participated in a research activity for course credit where cheating on a trivia game to win a cash prize by taking answers from a sealed folder was an option. As anticipated, sensation-seeking predicted cheating. Consistent with previous research, males were also more likely to cheat than females. Targeted interventions are suggested as a possible remedy.     

Southern College Students' Cheating Behaviors: An Examination of Problem Behavior Correlates

ABSTRACT

Understandings of cheating behavior by college students have focused on identifying rates at which students cheat and the identification of demographic characteristics. This paper focuses on demographic and other problem behaviors associated with cheating. Male and female samples from 12 southern colleges/universities are examined separately. Results show that males who cheat are more likely to be involved in four of seven other problem behaviors; females who cheat are likely to be involved in only one of seven other problematic behaviors. These findings suggest that cheating may be part of a larger problem behavior orientation for males but not females.     

Ethical Antecedents of Cheating Intentions: Evidence of Mediation

Although the pedagogy literature indicates significant relationships between cheating intentions and both personal and situational factors, no published research has examined the joint effect of personal moral philosophy and perceived moral intensity components on students’ cheating intentions. Hence, a structural equation model that relates magnitude of consequences, relativism, and idealism to willingness to cheat, is developed and tested. Using data from undergraduate business students, the empirical results provide insight into these relationships and evidence of mediation for magnitude of consequences on idealism and students’ cheating intentions. Implications for educators are offered.     

College Student Cheating: The Role of Motivation,Perceived Norms,Attitudes, and Knowledge of Institutional Policy

This study provides a comparative analysis of students' self-reported beliefs and behaviors related to six analogous pairs of conventional and digital forms of academic cheating. Results from an online survey of undergraduates at two universities (N = 1,305) suggest that students use conventional means more often than digital means to copy homework, collaborate when it is not permitted, and copy from others during an exam. However, engagement in digital plagiarism (cutting and pasting from the Internet) has surpassed conventional plagiarism. Students also reported using digital “cheat sheets” (i.e., notes stored in a digital device) to cheat on tests more often than conventional “cheat sheets.” Overall, 32% of students reported no cheating of any kind, 18.2% reported using only conventional methods, 4.2% reported using only digital methods, and 45.6% reported using both conventional and digital methods to cheat. “Digital only” cheaters were less likely than “conventional only” cheaters to report assignment cheating, but the former was more likely than the latter to report engagement in plagiarism. Students who cheated both conventionally and digitally were significantly different from the other three groups in terms of their self-reported engagement in all three types of cheating behavior. Students in this “both” group also had the lowest sense of moral responsibility to refrain from cheating and the greatest tendency to neutralize that responsibility. The scientific and educational implications of these findings are discussed in this study.     

The Case of the Stolen Psychology Test: An Analysis of an Actual Cheating Incident

We examined the attitudes of 600 students in large introductory algebra and psychology classes toward an actual or hypothetical cheating incident and the subsequent retake procedure. Overall, 57% of students in one class and 49Y0 in the other reported that they either cheated or would have cheated if given the opportunity. More men (59%) than women (53%) reported cheating or potential cheating. Students who had actually experienced a retake procedure to handle cheating were more satisfied with such a procedure than others were about a hypothetical situation. Despite having a retake, cheaters were significantly more likely than noncheaters to predict that they would cheat again. Results suggest that instructors who require a retake following extensive cheating should devote class time to a discussion of the issue and all possible alternatives.     

The relationship between cheating behavior and sensation-seeking

Academic dishonesty is a problem in academia and cheating is a problem in society at large. Sensation-seeking was proposed as a personality trait that is positively related to one’s likelihood to cheat. A sample of 105 undergraduates participated in a research activity for course credit where cheating on a trivia game to win a cash prize by taking answers from a sealed folder was an option. As anticipated, sensation-seeking predicted cheating. Consistent with previous research, males were also more likely to cheat than females. Targeted interventions are suggested as a possible remedy.     

Effects of personality-situation locus of control congruence.

The effects of combining personality and situation differences in locus of control on cheating behavior were tested. Eighty college students (36 male and 44 female) were classified as having relatively high internal or external locus of control beliefs using Rotter's Internal-External Scale. In subsequent individually conducted sessions, subjects were given the opportunity to falsely report success (i.e., to cheat) when success was objectively impossible and when the outcome was described as due to either skill or chance. A significant (p less than .001) Personality X Situation locus of control interaction found cheating more prevalent in congruent personality-situation combinations (internal-skill and external-chance) than in incongruent combinations (internal-chance and external-skill). Additional significant effects involving task persistence and postoperformance effort ratings suggested accounting for the results in an achievement motivational framework. As the Personality X Situation Locus of control interaction accounted for a large proportion of the variance, the results were considered to be supportive of an interactionist position regarding behavior prediction.     

The impact of moral theories on cheating

This research series began as a test of an emotion-attribution approach to moral behavior. However, in the early studies, college students who read about morality were subsequently more likely to cheat on a vocabulary test than were control subjects who read materials irrelevant to morality. We hypothesized that resentment toward the test constructors interacted with the moral schemas activated by the reading task. To reduce resentment, in Study III the vocabulary test was presented as the experimenter's doctoral research. As predicted, compared to controls, those subjects who read about morality cheated less. Study IV was a quasi-experiment that confirmed the hypothesized resentment differences between Study III and the earlier studies. In Study V, while two groups read about morality, one group read an internal emotion-attribution passage and the other read an external version; less cheating was observed in the internal condition than in the external or control conditions. The results indicate that even when moral schemas are elicited under conditions favoring moral behavior, those schemas will lead to reduced cheating most effectively under conditions in which subjects attribute their emotional arousal to their own behavior rather than to external causes. Issues of moral schema activation and emotion-attribution in moral behavior are discussed.     

Students’ Academic Cheating in Chinese Universities: Prevalence, Influencing Factors, and Proposed Action

Quantitative research about academic cheating among Chinese college students is minimal. This paper discusses a large survey conducted in Chinese colleges and universities which examined the prevalence of different kinds of student cheating and explored factors that influence cheating behavior. A structural equation model was used to analyze the data. Results indicate that organizational deterrence and individual performance have a negative impact on cheating while individual perceived pressure, peers’ cheating, and extracurricular activities have a positive impact. Recommendations are proposed to reduce the level of academic cheating in China. Many of these are universal in nature and applicable outside of China as well.     

Imitation Is the Sincerest Form of Cheating: The Influence of Direct Knowledge and Attitudes on Academic Dishonesty

What effect does witnessing other students cheat have on one's own cheating behavior? What roles do moral attitudes and neutralizing attitudes (justifications for behavior) play when deciding to cheat? The present research proposes a model of academic dishonesty which takes into account each of these variables. Findings from experimental (vignette) and survey methods determined that seeing others cheat increases cheating behavior by causing students to judge the behavior less morally reprehensible, not by making rationalization easier. Witnessing cheating also has unique effects, controlling for other variables.