The DOI matches its Crossref record; none of the 8 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS
Open accessAbstract
Background: The act of academic dishonesty is a dishonest act taken by students in completing assignments and examinations which include several attempts such as cheating and plagiarism. Studies show that 20% of students begin cheating behavior from the first year of college. One of the patterns of behavior related to academic dishonesty is procrastination. Academic procrastination is a form of behavior when someone delays starting a job or completing it.Aims: This study aims to illustrate academic procrastination, academic dishonesty, and the relationship between procrastination habits and academic dishonesty among undergraduate medical students at Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Lampung.Methods: This study is an observational analytic study using a cross-sectional design. The research respondents were 120 undergraduate medical students from Faculty of Medicine Universitas Lampung. The sampling method used proportionate stratified random sampling. Data were collected using the Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students questionnaire and the Academic Practices Survey.Results: The results of this study are processed using computer software and Gamma testing method. Obtained r = 0.464 and p = 0.428 (p>0.05).Conclusion: There is no relationship between the academic procrastination habits and academic dishonesty in undergraduate medical students at Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Lampung.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In a cross-sectional survey of 120 undergraduate medical students at Universitas Lampung, academic procrastination was not significantly related to academic dishonesty (Gamma r = 0.464, p = 0.428). Most students reported low procrastination (95.83%) and moderate frequency of academic dishonesty (83.33%).
Key findings
- No significant relationship was found between academic procrastination habits and academic dishonesty (r = 0.464; p = 0.428, p > 0.05), despite a positive correlation coefficient of moderate strength.
- Procrastination levels: 115 respondents (95.83%) low, 5 respondents (4.17%) high.
- Academic dishonesty frequency: 7 respondents (5.83%) low, 100 respondents (83.33%) moderate, 13 respondents (10.84%) high.
- Cross-tabulation: of the 5 high-procrastination students, 1 (20%) was high and 4 (80%) moderate on dishonesty, 0 low; of the 115 low-procrastination students, 12 (10.4%) were high, 96 (83.5%) moderate, and 7 (6.1%) low on dishonesty.
- The authors note the result contradicts prior studies (Rizki; Indah & Shofiah) that found a significant relationship, and suggest strict institutional sanctions and an ethics committee at FK UNILA may explain the moderate dishonesty levels.
Methods
- Observational analytic study with a cross-sectional design, conducted October–November 2019 at the Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Lampung; population was 795 active medical education students, with 120 sampled via proportionate stratified random sampling (36 fourth-year, 33 third-year, 28 second-year, 23 first-year).
- Data collected with the Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) for procrastination and the Academic Practices Survey (APS) for academic dishonesty, both translated into Indonesian and validated: PASS retained items after removing 5 invalid items (r = 0.7; Cronbach's alpha 0.81); APS removed 3 then 2 invalid items (r = 0.7; Cronbach's alpha 0.744).
- Variables were categorized (procrastination: low < 40, high ≥ 40; dishonesty: low < 32, moderate 32–52, high > 52 based on mean ± SD of 42 ± 10) and analyzed bivariately with the Gamma test for ordinal variables. Ethics approval no. 3495/UN26.18/PP.05.02.00/2019.
Limitations
- Stated by the authors: the PASS and APS instruments were developed in 1984 and 1995 respectively and need modification/development to fit current educational contexts; they recommend future research examine other factors influencing procrastination or dishonesty.
- Evident from the text: the cross-sectional design cannot establish causality or temporal ordering between procrastination and dishonesty; both measures rely on self-reported questionnaires, which are susceptible to social desirability bias; the sample comes from a single institution, limiting generalizability; and the highly skewed distribution (only 5 students in the high-procrastination category) leaves very few cases in key cells, which constrains the power of the Gamma analysis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
10 Own interpretation · 7 Sources not found · 5 Own method · 4 Own result
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is no relationship between the habits of academic procrastination with academic dishonesty in students of the Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Lampung.”
- Also stated in: § PRACTICE POINTS · plain
“Tidak terdapat hubungan antara kebiasaan prokrastinasi akademik dengan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik pada mahasiswa Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung.”
- Also stated in: § HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN · plain
“tidak ada hubungan bermakna antara kedua variabel”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
- Also stated in: § PRACTICE POINTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Obtained r = 0.464 and p = 0.428 (p>0.05).”
- Also stated in: § PRACTICE POINTS · plain
“diperoleh r = 0,464 dan p = 0,428 (p > 0,05)”
- Also stated in: § HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN · plain
“memiliki korelasi positif tidak signifikan (r = 0,464; p = 0,428)”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > Abstract
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
- Also stated in: § PRACTICE POINTS · plain
In the paper
“Berdasarkan penelitian mengenai ketidakjujuran akademik dan prokrastinasi didapatkan hasil bahwa terdapat kemungkinan besar mahasiswa yang membiasakan prokrastinasi akademik akan memilih untuk melakukan tindakan tidak jujur.9”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [9]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Berdasarkan penelitian mengenai alasan mahasiswa melakukan ketidakjujuran akademik didapatkan hasil bahwa 83% penyebabnya adalah kebiasaan prokrastinasi.5”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Hasil penelitian ini bertentangan dengan hasil penelitian yang telah dilakukan beberapa peneliti sebelumnya, seperti contohnya penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Rizki 7 serta penelitian yang dilakukan oleh Indah dan Shofiah 11 yang menyatakan bahwa terdapat hubungan antara prokrastinasi akademik dengan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rizki
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Indah dan Shofiah
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Data tersebut berarti mayoritas dari mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Dokter Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung cenderung memiliki tingkat frekuensi melakukan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik yang sedang.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Data tersebut berarti mayoritas dari mahasiswa Program Studi Pendidikan Dokter Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung cenderung memiliki tingkat kebiasaan prokrastinasi akademik yang rendah.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hal ini dapat menjadi faktor yang mendorong mahasiswa untuk melakukan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik untuk menyelesaikan tugas akademik yang belum selesai.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plainstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Prokrastinasi akademik memiliki pengaruh tidak langsung terhadap tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik yang dilakukan oleh seorang mahasiswa.12”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [12]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“pernah dilakukan penelitian di Jerman yang mendapatkan hasil bahwa prokrastinasi akademik merupakan salah satu faktor yang berperan besar di balik tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik.10”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [10]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- It may state two separate claims as one. 10
- The quote only partly states this claim. 3
- Probably not a substantial claim. 10
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“responden dengan tingkat frekuensi tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik rendah yaitu 7 orang (5,83%), tingkat frekuensi tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik sedang 100 orang (83,33%), dan tingkat frekuensi tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik tinggi 13 orang (10,84%)”
- Also stated in: § KESIMPULAN · plain
“tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik rendah yaitu 7 orang (5,83%), tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik sedang 100 orang (83,33%), dan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik tinggi 13 orang (10,84%)”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
- Also stated in: § KESIMPULAN · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“responden dengan tingkat kebiasaan prokrastinasi akademik rendah yaitu 115 orang (95,83%), dan tingkat kebiasaan prokrastinasi akademik tinggi 5 orang (4,17%)”
- Also stated in: § KESIMPULAN · plain
“prokrastinasi akademik rendah yaitu 115 orang (95,83%), dan prokrastinasi akademik tinggi terdiri dari 5 orang (4,17%)”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
- Also stated in: § KESIMPULAN · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mahasiswa lebih sering melakukan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik dikarenakan ingin mendapatkan nilai yang lebih baik juga didukung oleh kenyataannya dimana dalam proses pendidikan hanya difokuskan untuk mendapat angka/nilai”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“faktor yang kemungkinan mempengaruhi pola pikir mahasiswa adalah terdapat sanksi tegas, dan keberadaan komisi etik yang mempengaruhi mahasiswa berpikir dua kali untuk melakukan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hal tersebut dapat disebabkan oleh kurangnya kontrol diri pada mahasiswa.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Setelah dilakukan uji validitas kembali, didapatkan nilai r hitung > r tabel, yaitu r = 0,7 dan nilai Cronbach Alpha 0,744 untuk instrumen APS.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plainn = 45- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Setelah dilakukan uji validitas kembali, didapatkan nilai r hitung > r tabel, yaitu r = 0,7 dan nilai Cronbach Alpha 0,81 untuk instrumen PASS.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plainn = 45- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Penelitian yang telah dilakukan oleh Jones, 5 mengemukakan bahwa dibandingkan kebiasaan prokrastinasi akademik, mahasiswa lebih sering melakukan tindakan ketidakjujuran akademik dikarenakan ingin mendapatkan nilai yang lebih baik (92% dari responden penelitian).”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Jones
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adapun sampel penelitian berjumlah 120 orang yang didapatkan dengan menggunakan rumus analitik korelatif”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Berdasarkan theory of crime yang dikemukakan oleh Gottfredson dan Hirschi (dalam Bolin), 16 kurangnya kontrol diri, adanya kesempatan dan interaksi antara keduanya merupakan penyebab utama dari semua perilaku curang, termasuk perilaku ketidakjujuran akademik.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Gottfredson dan Hirschi (dalam Bolin)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Penelitian ini telah mendapat persetujuan dari Komite Etik Penelitian Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung dengan nomor 3495/ UN26.18/PP.05.02.00/2019.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sampel ditentukan secara proportionated stratified random sampling dengan memperhatikan kriteria inklusi.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > PRACTICE POINTS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pada umumnya banyak mahasiswa yang berorientasi pada nilai, bukan proses untuk mendapatkan ilmu, sehingga segala upaya dilakukan agar dapat berhasil dalam ujian, termasuk melakukan berbagai perilaku kecurangan.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hal tersebut kemungkinan berkaitan dengan keadaan yang ada pada FK UNILA dimana terdapat sanksi tegas dan komite etik yang dapat menindak lanjuti tindakan tersebut.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“keinginan mahasiswa untuk memperoleh hasil yang lebih baik dengan instan yang terkadang tidak disertai dengan kemauan berusaha, karena itu sering muncul keinginan untuk mendapat hasil dengan cara yang singkat dan mudah yaitu dengan cara menyontek.”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nilai r yang diperoleh adalah 0,464 menunjukkan kekuatan hubungan positif cukup kuat”
§ THE RELATIONSHIP OF ACADEMIC PROCRASTINATION AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY IN UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL STUDENTS > HASIL DAN PEMBAHASAN
hedgedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Rests on an assumption: Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
- Rests on an assumption: The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
The paper relies on this without support.
Students answered the PASS and APS questionnaires honestly and accurately, so self-reported academic procrastination and academic dishonesty reflect their actual behavior.
“Pengambilan data primer menggunakan instrumen Procrastination Assessment Scale-Students (PASS) untuk menilai prokrastinasi akademik dan Academic Practices Survey (APS) untuk menilai ketidakjujuran akademik.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The sample of 120 students selected by proportionate stratified random sampling is representative of the population of 795 active medical students at FK Unila.
“Populasi pada penelitian ini adalah 795 orang mahasiswa aktif Program Studi Pendidikan Dokter Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Lampung.Adapun sampel penelitian berjumlah 120 orang yang didapatkan dengan menggunakan rumus analitik korelatif”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Kaufman HE. Moral and ethical issues related to academic dishonesty on college campuses. Journal of College & Character. 2008; 9(5).
- Lovett-Hooper G, Komarraju M, Weston R. Is plagiarism a forerunner of other deviance? Imagined futures of academically dishonest students. Ethics & Behavior. 2007; 17: 323-36.
- Rujoiu O, Rujoiu V. Academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty, an overview. Proceedings Oktaria D et al., JPKI, 2021; 10(3): 207-214
- Solomon LJ, Rothblum ED. Academic procrastination: frequency and cognitive- behavioral correlates. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 1984; 31(4).
- Catrunada L, Puspitawati I. Procrastination tasks differences on thesis introvert and extrovert personality [skripsi]. Depok: Fakultas Psikologi Universitas Gunadarma; 2008.
- Patrzek J, Sattler S, Veen FV, Grunsche C, Fries S. Investigating the effect of academic procrastination on the frequency and variety of academic misconduct: a panel study. Studies in Higher Education. 2015; 40(6): 1014-29.
- Indah PS, Shofiah V. Hubungan prokrastinasi akademik dengan ketidakjujuran akademik pada mahasiswa psikologi UIN Suska Riau. Jurnal Psikologi, 2012; 8 (1): 29-36.
- Hendricks B. 2004. Academic dishonesty: a study in the magnitude of and justification for academic dishonesty among college undergraduate and graduate students. Journal of College Student Development. March 2004; (35): 212-260.
- Lewellyn P, Rodriguez L. Does academic dishonesty relate to fraud theory? a comparative analysis. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 2015; 5(3): 294-305
- Bolin AU. Self control, perceived opportunity, and attitudes as predictor of academic dishonesty. The Journal of Psychology Arkansas State University. 2004; 138(2): 101-114
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Aruğaslan, E. (2024) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38827 · Cited by 36
Academic Integrity of Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed Method Analysis
Jose, A. E. S. (2022) · European Journal of Education and Pedagogy · doi:10.24018/ejedu.2022.3.4.400 · Cited by 30
Subekti, A. S. (2023) · Journal of language and Education · doi:10.17323/jle.2023.14717 · Cited by 9
Saranga, R., Pangemanan, D. H. C., & Tompodung, L. M. (2025) · Medical Scope Journal · doi:10.35790/msj.v8i1.61338 · Cited by 4
Ramdani, Z., Natanael, Y., Liem, A., Kamil, A. A., Hadiana, D., & Warsihna, J. (2024) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-07-2024-0329 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Oktaria, D., Azzahra, S. S., & Angraini, D. I.
- Affiliations
- Lampung University (ID)
- Corresponding author
- Oktaria, Dwita
- Venue
- Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia: The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education
- Publisher
- Universitas Gadjah Mada
- Published
- 2021-11-24
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 207
- ISSN
- 2252-5084 (ISSN-L)
- 2654-5810
- OpenAlex
- W3213591349
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 1.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Indonesian Journal of Biotechnology (Universitas Gadjah Mada) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia (Universitas Gadjah Mada) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Academic integrity and plagiarism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Perfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Outcomes and Influences
- Keywords
- academic procrastination, academic dishonesty, cheating, plagiarism, medical students, undergraduate medical education, academic practice
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
