CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 161Academic integrity and plagiarismEthics in Business and EducationLegal Issues in Education

Faculty responses to academic dishonesty: The influence of student honor codes

McCabe, Donald L.·1993·Research in Higher Education
DOI 10.1007/bf00991924
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00991924

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The lack of administrative support may contribute to the very low rates at which instructors formally report violations.

    “The lack of administrative support may contribute to the very low rates at which instructors formally report violations (McCabe, 1993;Nelson, 2021).”

    From Maintaining Academic Integrity Through AI-Trap Questions (2025) · cites this paper as McCabe, 1993

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McCabe, D. L.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
McCabe, Donald L.
Venue
Research in Higher Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1993-10
Volume
34
Issue
5
Pages
647-658
ISSN
  • 0361-0365 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-188X
DOI
10.1007/bf00991924
OpenAlex
W1994224257
Cited by
161
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Research in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Social Sciences › Law › Legal Issues in Education
Keywords
academic dishonesty, cheating, faculty responses, teacher perceptions, student perceptions, university students, academic integrity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review