Measuring plagiarism: researching what students do, not what they say they do
Open accessAbstract
Student plagiarism in colleges and universities has become a controversial issue in recent years. A key problem has been the lack of reliable empirical data on the frequency, nature and extent of plagiarism in student assignments. The aim of the study described here was to provide this data. Patterns of plagiarism were tracked in two university business studies assignments involving over 500 students and over 1000 scripts. Turnitin software was used to facilitate the identification of plagiarised material in assignments. The findings confirmed some common assertions about the nature of student plagiarism but did not provide support for a number of others.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In digital assessments, coversheets serve as vital mechanisms for conveying academic integrity guidelines, often requiring signed declarations or electronic acknowledgments for online submissions.
“In digital assessments, they serve as vital mechanisms for conveying academic integrity guidelines (Mulcahy and Goodacre 2004; Walker 2010) often requiring signed declarations or electronic acknowledgments for online submissions (Velliaris and Breen 2016).”
From Addressing student non-compliance in AI use declarations: implications for academic integrity and assessment in higher education (2025) · cites this paper as Walker 2010
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Brown, B. S. 1995. The academic ethics of business graduates: A survey. Journal of Education for Business 70, no. 3: 151-156.
- Compton, J., and M. Pfau. 2008. Inoculating against pro-plagiarism justifications: Rational and affective strategies. Journal of Applied Communication Research 36, no. 1: 98-119.
- McLafferty, C. L., and K. M. Foust. 2004. Electronic plagiarism as a college instructor's nightmare -prevention and detection. Journal of Education for Business 79, no. 3: 186-189.
- Newstead, S. E., A. Franklyn-Stokes, and P. Armistead. 1996. Individual differences in student cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology 88, no. 2: 229-241.
- Rakovski, C. C., and E. S. Levy. 2007. Academic dishonesty: Perceptions of business students. College Student Journal 41, no. 2: 466-481.
- Robinson-Zañartu, C., E. D. Peña, V. Cook-Morales, A. M. Peña, R. Afshani, and L. Nguyen. 2005. Academic crime and punishment: Faculty members' perceptions of and responses to plagiarism. School Psychology Quarterly, 20, 3: 318-337.
- Scanlon, P. M., and D. R. Neumann. 2002. Internet plagiarism among college students. Journal of College Student Development 43, no. 3: 374-385.
- Scurrah, W. L. 2001. Plagiarism, enclosure, and the commons of the mind. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, March: 14-17, in Denver, CO.
- Williams, B. T. 2008. Trust, betrayal and authorship: Plagiarism and how we perceive students. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 51, no. 4: 350-354.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Contract cheating: a survey of australian university students
Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., Saddiqui, S., & van Haeringen, K. (2019) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788 · Cited by 476 · see citing works
Reducing plagiarism through academic misconduct education
Perkins, M., Gezgin, U. B., & Roe, J. (2020) · International Journal for Educational Integrity · doi:10.1007/s40979-020-00052-8 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Gonsalves, C. (2025) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602938.2024.2415654 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
“In digital assessments, they serve as vital mechanisms for conveying academic integrity guidelines (Mulcahy and Goodacre 2004; Walker 2010) often requiring signed declarations or electronic acknowledgments for online submissions (velliaris and Breen 2016). despite their longstanding use, limited…”
Yazici, S., Yildiz Durak, H., Aksu Dünya, B., & Şentürk, B. (2023) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12743 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Pertile, S. D. L., Moreira, V. P., & Rosso, P. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23593 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
- Authors
- Walker, J.
- Affiliations
- Massey University (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Walker, John
- Venue
- Studies in Higher Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-11-17
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 41-59
- ISSN
- 0307-5079 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-174X
- OpenAlex
- W2012807394
- Cited by
- 236
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 16
- FWCI
- 19.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- Studies in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
- Massey Research Online (Massey University) (acceptedVersion)
- Massey Research Online (Massey University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
- Keywords
- student plagiarism, Turnitin, academic integrity, student assignments, business education, plagiarism detection software
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
