CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 45Academic integrity and plagiarismEducation during COVID-19 pandemicOnline and Blended Learning

Online versus face-to-face cheating: the prevalence of cheating behaviours during the pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic among turkish university students

Yazici, Sedat, Yildiz Durak, Hatice, Aksu Dünya, Beyza, Şentürk, Burcu·2023·Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
DOI 10.1111/jcal.12743
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background: During the COVID‐19 period, academics and higher education institutions have shown deep concern about academic integrity related to measurement and evaluation issues that have arisen in online education. Objectives: To address this concern, this paper examined the prevalence of cheating behaviour among university students before and during the pandemic by comparing self‐reported cheating behaviours of students and academics' perceived levels of cheating behaviours of their students. Methods: A correlational design was employed aligned with study objectives. Results and Conclusions: The results indicate that although both groups reported a significant increase in cheating incidents in online education, instructors' perceived frequency of student cheating is remarkably greater than students' self‐report cheating incidents. Contrary to the perceptions of instructors and stakeholders in education, students did not report a very drastic cheating increase in online education during the pandemic. The strongest predictive power for online cheating behaviours was the cheating behaviours in face‐to‐face education. Whereas the sensitivity of institutions and course instructors toward cheating behaviour was negatively associated with cheating behaviours in face‐to‐face education, this situational factor did not show a significant effect in distance education. Regarding individual factors, we found a significant relationship between cheating behaviours and gender, discipline, whereas no significant relationship was found in terms of student GPA. Consequently, in order to minimize the threats to the validity of scores associated with cheating, faculty should be supported through faculty development programs and resources so that they can develop authentic assessment strategies for measuring higher‐order thinking skills.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/jcal.12743

Cites

68 of 68 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Yazici, S., Yildiz Durak, H., Aksu Dünya, B., & Şentürk, B.
Affiliations
  • Faculty of Literature, Department of Philosophy Bartin University Bartın Turkey
  • Eregli Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Science Necmettin Erbakan University Konya Turkey
  • Faculty of Education, Department of Educational Science Bartin University Bartın Turkey
  • Bartin University (TR)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-09-19
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
231-254
ISSN
  • 0266-4909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2729
DOI
10.1111/jcal.12743
OpenAlex
W4296782459
Cited by
45
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 1
FWCI
11.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Academic integrity and plagiarism
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
academic dishonesty, online learning, COVID-19 pandemic, academic integrity, university students, instructor perceptions, distance education, authentic assessment, higher-order thinking skills, faculty development, gender differences, disciplinary differences

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