The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Self-Control, Perceived Opportunity, and Attitudes as Predictors of Academic Dishonesty
Abstract
Academic dishonesty is a persistent and pervasive problem on college campuses. Researchers have suggested a variety of factors that influence academic dishonesty. The present study is an examination of the roles of self-control, attitude toward academic dishonesty, and perceived opportunity in predicting academic dishonesty. The dataset consisted of 853 survey responses from university students across the United States. The results showed that attitude toward academic dishonesty mediated the relationship between self-control and academic dishonesty and also between perceived opportunity and academic dishonesty. Implications of these findings are briefly discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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 the citing paper
“This study also chooses ATAD as a dependent variable, because Bolin [20] argues that ATAD is a good predictor of actual academic dishonesty.”
From Millennials’ Sleep and Unethical Behavior: Testing the Relationship between Sleep and Academic Dishonesty of Millennials in a Korean University (2020) · cites this paper as Bolin [20]
In the citing paper
“Academic dishonesty is a persistent and pervasive unethical behavior on college campuses in the world, including in the United States and the Republic of Korea [18][19][20].”
From Millennials’ Sleep and Unethical Behavior: Testing the Relationship between Sleep and Academic Dishonesty of Millennials in a Korean University (2020) · cites this paper as [20]
Citations
Cites
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9781503621794 · Cited by 10,127
Academic Dishonesty: Honor Codes and other Contextual Influences
McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1993) · The Journal of Higher Education · doi:10.1080/00221546.1993.11778446 · Cited by 855
Research works printed but not linked: 27
- Ames, G., & Eskridge, C. (1992). The impact of ethics courses on student attitudes and behavior regarding cheating. Journal of College Student Development, 33(6), 556.
- Arneklev, B. J., Grasmick, H. G., Tittle, C. R., & Bursik, R. J. (1993). Low self-control and imprudent behavior. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 15, 307-331. · DOI
- Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 10, 238-246. · DOI · Paper page
- Uhlig, G. E., & Howes, B. (1967). Attitude toward cheating and opportunistic behavior. The Journal of Education Research, 60(9), 411-412. · DOI
- Vazsonyi, A. T., Pickering, L. E., Junger, M., & Hessing, D. (2001). An empirical test of a general theory of crime: A four-nation comparative study of self-control and the prediction of deviance. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 38(2), 91-132. · DOI · Paper page
- Wood, P. B., Pfefferbaum, B., & Arneklev, B. J. (1993) Risk-taking and self-control: Psychological correlates of delinquency. Journal of Criminal Justice, 16, 111-130. · DOI
- Bolin, A., & Heatherly, L. (2001). Predictors of employee deviance: The relationship between bad attitudes and bad behavior. Journal of Business and Psychology, 15(3), 405-418. · DOI
- Brown, B. S., & Emmett, D. (2001). Explaining variations in the level of academic dishonesty in studies of college students: Some new evidence. College Student Journal, 35(4), 529-539.
- Browne, M. W. (1982). Covariance structures. In D. M. Hawkins (Ed.), Topics in multi-variate analysis. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Cudeck, R., & Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multi-variate Behavioral Research, 18, 147-167. · DOI
- Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A., Becker, A. H., & McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic dishonesty: Prevalence, determinants, techniques, and punishment. Teaching of Psychology, 19(1), 16-20. · DOI
- Drake, C. A. (1941). Why students cheat. Journal of Higher Education, 12, 418-420. · DOI
- Eskridge, C., & Ames, G. A. (1993). Attitudes about cheating and self-reported cheating behaviors of criminal justice majors and noncriminal justice majors: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 4(1), 65-78. · DOI
- Eve, R., & Bromley, D. G. (1981). Scholastic dishonesty among college undergraduates: Parallel test of two sociological explanations. Youth and Society, 13, 3-22. · DOI
- 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.
- Grasmick, H. G., & Tittle, C. R. (1993). Testing the core empirical implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 30(1), 5-30. · DOI
- Mears, D. P., & Ploeger, M. (1998). Explaining the gender gap in delinquency: Peer influence and moral evaluations of behavior. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 35(3), 251-267. · DOI
- Medsker, G., Williams, L. J., & Holahan, P. J. (1994). A review of current practices for evaluating causal models in organizational behavior and human resources management. Journal of Management, 20, 439-464. · DOI
- Mulaik, S. A., James, W. S., Van Alstine, J., Bennett, N., Lind, S., & Stilwell, C. D. (1989). Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 430-445. · DOI
- Piquero, A., & Tibbets, S. (1996). Specifying the direct and indirect effects of low self-control and situational factors in offenders' decision making: Toward a more complete model of rational offending. Justice Quarterly, 13, 481-510. · DOI
- Sierles, F., Hendrickx, I., & Circle, S. (1980). Cheating in medical school. Journal of Medical Education, 55, 124-125. · DOI
- Steiger, J. H. (1988). Aspects of person-machine communication in structural modeling of correlations and covariances. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 23, 281-290. · DOI
- Stern, E. B., & Havlicek, L. (1986). Academic misconduct: Results of faculty and undergraduate student surveys. Journal of Allied Health, 5, 129-142.
- Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1-10. · DOI · Paper page
- Haines, V. J., Diekhoff, G. M., LaBeff, E. E., & Clark, R. E. (1986). College cheating: Immaturity, lack of commitment and the neutralizing attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25(4), 342-354. · DOI
- Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL: A guide to the program and applications (2nd ed.). Chicago: SPSS.
- McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 38(3), 379-397. · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2010) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/01973530903539895 · Cited by 198
Factors That Explain Academic Dishonesty Among University Students in Thailand
Thomas, D. (2017) · Ethics & Behavior · doi:10.1080/10508422.2015.1131160 · Cited by 64
Honor Codes and Academic Integrity: Three Decades of Research
Tatum, H. E. (2022) · Journal of College and Character · doi:10.1080/2194587x.2021.2017977 · Cited by 63
Personality, intelligence, and counterproductive academic behaviors: A meta-analysis
Cuadrado, D., Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S. (2021) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/pspp0000285 · Cited by 63
An online testing design choice typology towards cheating threat minimisation
Munoz, A., & Mackay, J. (2019) · Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice · doi:10.53761/1.16.3.5 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Bolin, A. U.
- Venue
- The Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-01
- Volume
- 138
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 101-114
- ISSN
- 0022-3980
- 1940-1019
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Self-Control, Perceived Opportunity, and Attitudes as Predictors of Academic Dishonesty. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3200/jrlp.138.2.101-114
- The paper
- Bolin, A. U. (2004). Self-Control, Perceived Opportunity, and Attitudes as Predictors of Academic Dishonesty. The Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3200/jrlp.138.2.101-114