CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 158Academic integrity and plagiarismPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesStudent Stress and Coping

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.

Investigating the effect of academic procrastination on the frequency and variety of academic misconduct: a panel study

Patrzek, Justine, Sattler, Sebastian, van Veen, Floris, Grunschel, Carola, Fries, Stefan·2015·Studies in Higher Education
DOI 10.1080/03075079.2013.854765
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In prior studies, academic procrastination has been discussed as an influencing factor of academic misconduct. However, empirical studies were conducted solely cross-sectionally and investigated only a few forms of academic misconduct. This large scale web-based study examined the responses of between 1359 and 2207 participants from different academic disciplines at four German universities to address the effect of academic procrastination on seven different forms of academic misconduct (using fraudulent excuses, plagiarism, copying from someone else in exams, using forbidden means in exams, carrying forbidden means into exams, copying parts of homework from others, and fabrication or falsification of data) and its variety. In measuring academic procrastination six months prior to academic misconduct, we found that academic procrastination affected the frequency of all forms of academic misconduct and its variety. We found the strongest effect of academic procrastination on using fraudulent excuses. Implications for university counseling and theory are discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03075079.2013.854765

Cites

63 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 63 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Göritz, A.S. 2006. Incentives in web surveys: Methodological issues and a review. International Journal of Internet Science 1, no. 1: 58–70.
  2. 10.2307/3149860 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Patrzek, J., Sattler, S., van Veen, F., Grunschel, C., & Fries, S.
Affiliations
Bielefeld University (DE)
Corresponding author
Patrzek, Justine
ORCID
Venue
Studies in Higher Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2014-03-14
Volume
40
Issue
6
Pages
1014-1029
ISSN
  • 0307-5079 (ISSN-L)
  • 1470-174X
DOI
10.1080/03075079.2013.854765
OpenAlex
W2036604372
Semantic Scholar
230cb6ba07a206e9a27afd29402c9eee908b3785
Cited by
158
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
17.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Studies in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
  • PUB – Publications at Bielefeld University (Bielefeld University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01PH08024, 01PH08005A)
  • Rectorate Fellowship of the Bielefeld University (3521.01)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
academic procrastination, academic misconduct, plagiarism, cheating, fabrication and falsification, academic dishonesty, university students, student counseling

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