CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Academic integrity and plagiarismEthics in Business and EducationLegal Issues in Education

Factors that Influence Faculty Actions: A Study on Faculty Responses to Academic Dishonesty

Open access
Coalter, Terry, Lim, Chi Lo, Wanorie, Tekle·2007·International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
DOI 10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010112
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Persistent academic dishonesty has perplexed researchers who focus their studies on why students cheat. There are limited studies regarding the faculty perspective of this issue. This study explores factors that influence faculty action when faced with dishonesty or evidence of dishonesty. A questionnaire consisting of thirty-five items was sent to all 242 faculty members of a mid-size state university in the United States . The results of the study indicated that a majority of the respondents agree that dishonesty is a major problem, and they agreed that it is critical to take proactive measures to deter dishonesty; however, the respondents did not agree on whether the judicial process is fair and impartial. A majority of the respondents stated that they would comply with the institution's honesty policy, but 82.9% indicated that it was difficult to compile evidence or proof of misconduct. Other results indicated that the amount of time required to pursue suspected incidents appeared to deter faculty from taking actions.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010112

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • When instructors address academic integrity violations, they often perceive a lack of support from their institution.

    “When instructors do decide to forge ahead and address academic integrity violations, they often perceive a lack of support from their institution (Coalter et al., 2007).”

    From Maintaining Academic Integrity Through AI-Trap Questions (2025) · cites this paper as Coalter et al., 2007

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Barnett, D. C., & Dalton, J. C. (1981). Why college students cheat. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 545-551.
  2. Colby, A., Ehrlich, T., Beaumont, E., Rosner, J., & Stephens, J. (2000). Higher education and the development of civic responsibility. In T. Ehrlich (Ed.), Civic Responsibility and Higher Education. Phoenix, AZ: The American Council on Education and The Oryx Press.
  3. Graham, M.A., Monday, J., O'Brien, K. & Steffen, S. (1994). Cheating at small colleges: An examination of student and faculty attitudes and behaviors. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 255-260.
  4. Hall, T.L. (1996). Honor among students: Academic integrity and student cultures. (Doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 1996). Dissertation Abstracts International. 57
  5. Jendrek, M. P. (1989). Faculty reactions to academic dishonesty. Journal of College Student Development, 30, 401-406.
  6. Keying In: The Newsletter of the National Business Education Association (Jan 2004). Employers value communication and interpersonal abilities. 14(3), pp.1, 3-6.
  7. Lim, C. L. & Coalter, T. (2006) Academic Integrity: An Instructor's Obligation. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Retrieved October 15, 2006, from: http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE51.pdf Volume 17, Number 2, p. 155-159.
  8. Marcoux, H. E. (2002), Kansas State University Faculty Perspectives, Opinions, and Practices Concerning Undergraduate Student Academic Dishonesty and Moral Development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University.
  9. Marino, G. (2004). Before Teaching Ethics, Stop Kidding Yourself. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Volume 50, Issue 24, p B5, February 20. The Chronicle Review.
  10. Paldy, L. G. (1996). The problem that won't go away: Addressing the causes of cheating. Journal of College Science Teaching, 26, 4-6.
  11. Yankelocih, D. & Furth, I. (2005). The Role of Colleges in an Era of Mistrust, The Chronicle of Higher Education. Volume 52, Issue24, p B8, September 16. The Chronicle Review.
  12. Zoll, M.J. (1996). A matter of honor: Do students understand and uphold the honor code? (Doctoral dissertation, University of LaVerne, 1996) Dissertation Abstracts International. 58

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Coalter, T., Lim, C. L., & Wanorie, T.
Affiliations
Northwest Missouri State University (US)
Venue
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Publisher
Georgia Southern University
Published
2007-01-01
Volume
1
Issue
1
ISSN
1931-4744 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.20429/ijsotl.2007.010112
OpenAlex
W1535782286
Cited by
49
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
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, academic integrity, teacher perceptions, higher education

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