Cited by 34Academic integrity and plagiarismHigher Education Research StudiesEthics in Business and Education

The Relationship between Student Cheating and College Fraternity or Sorority Membership

McCabe, Donald L., Bowers, William J.·1996·NASPA Journal

Abstract

This study examines and compares the self-reported cheating behaviors of fraternity and non-fraternily members and the relation between student cheating and the overall level of fraternity or sorority membership on campus. The influence of peer disapproval of cheating on the relationship between fraternity or sorority membership and self-reported cheating is also examined.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00220973.1996.11072416

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

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
McCabe, D. L., & Bowers, W. J.
Venue
NASPA Journal
Published
1996-07
Volume
33
Issue
4
Pages
280-291
ISSN
  • 0027-6014 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-5455
OpenAlex
W4252906038
Cited by
34
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
NASPA Journal (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
Keywords
academic dishonesty, peer disapproval, university students, student organizations, 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