CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 37

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence and Correlates of Academic Dishonesty: Towards a Sustainable University

Cuadrado, Dámaris, Salgado, Jesús F., Moscoso, Silvia·2019·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su11216062
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Academic dishonesty (AD) is a problem that affects all higher education institutions. It hurts their reputation, undermines integrity programs, and sidelines sustainability efforts. To understand its negative impact, the empirical study of AD is a critical issue. Up to now, the majority of research on AD has taken place in the North American context. The current research analyzes the prevalence of AD in a non-American university and, focusing on individual differences, examines some of its causes and consequences. The results prove that: (1) AD is a problem that occurs frequently among students; (2) three dimensions of the big five personality model correlate with AD. These are conscientiousness (ρ = −0.49, p < 0.01), extraversion (ρ = 0.39, p < 0.01), and agreeableness (ρ = −0.14, p < 0.01); (3) AD is associated to students’ GPA (Grade Point Average) (ρ = −0.34, p < 0.01) and contextual performance (ρ = −0.50, p < 0.01); (4) personality accounts for 30% of AD variance (R = 0.55, p < 0.01); and (5) AD and some of the studied individual differences explain 38% and 41% of GPA and contextual performance variance (R = 0.62, p < 0.01 and R = 0.64, p < 0.01). Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Overview

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 · 10.3390/su11216062

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Note: C = conscientiousness, A = agreeableness; GMA = general mental ability; AD = academic dishonesty; GPA = grade point average.
Note: C = conscientiousness, A = agreeableness; GMA = general mental ability; AD = academic dishonesty; GPA = grade point average.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Graphical representation of Model 2. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01.
Figure 4 Graphical representation of Model 2. * p < 0.05. ** p < 0.01.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. Pfeffer, 2010, Building sustainable organizations: The human factor, Acad. Manag. Perspect., 24, 34
  2. Sammalisto, 2008, Integration of sustainability in higher education: A study with international perspectives, Innov. High. Educ., 32, 221, 10.1007/s10755-007-9052-x · DOI
  3. 2017, The psychology of sustainability and sustainable development for well-being in organizations, Front. Psychol., 8, 1534, 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01534 · DOI
  4. Kuncel, 2010, Individual differences as predictors of work, educational, and broad life outcomes, Personal. Individ. Differ., 49, 331, 10.1016/j.paid.2010.03.042 · DOI
  5. Postlethwaite, B.E. (2011). Fluid Ability, Crystallized Ability, and Performance across Multiple Domains: A Meta-Analysis. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Iowa].
  6. Salgado, 2016, A theoretical model of psychometric effects of faking on assessment procedures: Empirical findings and implications for personality at work, Int. J. Sel. Assess., 24, 209, 10.1111/ijsa.12142 · DOI
  7. Strenze, 2007, Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal research, Intelligence, 35, 401, 10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.004 · DOI
  8. Paunonen, 2007, Big Five personality predictors of post-secondary academic performance, Personal. Individ. Differ., 43, 971, 10.1016/j.paid.2007.03.017 · DOI
  9. Dilchert, 2018, Counterproductive sustainability behaviors and their relationship to personality traits, Int. J. Sel. Assess., 26, 49, 10.1111/ijsa.12204 · DOI
  10. Whitley, B.E., and Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic Dishonesty: An Educator’s Guide, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. · DOI
  11. Brimble, 2005, Perceptions of the Prevalence and Seriousness of Academic Dishonesty in Australian Universities, Aust. Educ. Res., 32, 19, 10.1007/BF03216825 · DOI
  12. Ison, 2015, The influence of the Internet on plagiarism among doctoral dissertations: An empirical study, J. Acad. Ethics, 13, 151, 10.1007/s10805-015-9233-7 · DOI
  13. Teixeira, 2006, Academic cheating in Austria, Portugal, Romania and Spain: A comparative analysis, Res. Comp. Int. Educ., 1, 198, 10.2304/rcie.2006.1.3.198 · DOI
  14. Teixeira, 2010, Cheating by economics and business undergraduate students: An exploratory international assessment, High. Educ., 59, 663, 10.1007/s10734-009-9274-1 · DOI
  15. Hendy, 2017, Forced-choice personality measures and academic dishonesty: A comparative study, J. Acad. Ethics, 15, 293, 10.1007/s10805-017-9280-3 · DOI
  16. Williams, 2010, Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: Their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation, J. Exp. Psyhol. Appl., 16, 293, 10.1037/a0020773 · DOI
  17. Cuadrado, D., Salgado, J.F., and Moscoso, S. (2019). Personality, Intelligence, and Academic Dishonesty: A Meta-analysis. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol., Under review.
  18. Giluk, 2015, Big Five Personality and Academic Dishonesty: A Meta-analytic Review, Personal. Individ. Differ., 72, 59, 10.1016/j.paid.2014.08.027 · DOI
  19. Roch, 2010, Class Attendance in College: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Relationship of Class Attendance with Grades and Student Characteristics, Rev. Educ. Res., 80, 272, 10.3102/0034654310362998 · DOI
  20. Salgado, 2017, Moderator effects of job complexity on the validity of forced-choice personality inventories for predicting job performance, J. Work Organ. Psychol., 33, 229
  21. Salgado, 2015, The validity of ipsative and quasi-ipsative forced-choice personality inventories for different occupational groups: A comprehensive meta-analysis, J. Occup. Organ. Psychol., 88, 797, 10.1111/joop.12098 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Salgado, 2018, Faking resistance of a quasi-ipsative forced-choice personality inventory without algebraic dependence, J. Work Organ. Psychol., 34, 213
  23. Viswesvaran, 1999, Meta-analyses of fakability estimates: Implications for personality measurement, Educ. Psychol. Meas., 59, 197, 10.1177/00131649921969802 · DOI
  24. Birkeland, 2006, A meta-analytic investigation of job applicant faking on personality measures, Int. J. Sel. Assess., 14, 317, 10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00354.x · DOI
  25. Cao, M., and Drasgow, F. (2019). Does forcing reduce faking? A meta-analytic review of forced-choice personality measures in high-stakes situations. J. Appl. Psychol. · DOI
  26. Martínez, A. (2019). Empirical Evaluation of a Theoretical Model of the Faking Effects on Occupational Personality Measures. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Santiago de Compostela].
  27. Dilchert, 2007, Cognitive Ability Predicts Objectively Measured Counterproductive Work Behaviors, J. Appl. Psychol., 92, 616, 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.616 · DOI
  28. Kuncel, 2004, Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all?, J. Personal. Soc. Psychol., 86, 148, 10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.148 · DOI
  29. Salgado, J.F., and Moscoso, S. (2019). A New Look at Validity of the GATB Tests of General Mental Ability for Five Academic and Organizational Criteria. Front. Psychol., in press.
  30. Paulhus, 2015, The link between cognitive ability and scholastic cheating: A meta-analysis, Rev. Gen. Psychol., 19, 183, 10.1037/gpr0000040 · DOI
  31. Cuadrado, D. (2018). Deshonestidad Académica, Desempeño y Diferencias Individuales. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Santiago de Compostela].
  32. Briihl, 2001, Life after College: Psychology Students’ Perceptions of Salary, Business Hiring Criteria, and Graduate Admission Criteria, N. Am. J. Psychol., 3, 321
  33. Wing, L.C., and Gifford, B.R. (1994). The Validity and Fairness of Alternatives to Cognitive Tests. Policy Issues in Employment Testing, Kluwer. · DOI
  34. Rynes, 1997, Experienced hiring versus college recruiting: Practices and emerging trends, Personal. Psychol., 50, 309, 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1997.tb00910.x · DOI
  35. Borman, 2001, Personality Predictors of Citizenship Performance, Int. J. Sel. Assess., 9, 52, 10.1111/1468-2389.00163 · DOI
  36. Hoffman, 2007, Expanding the criterion domain? A quantitative review of the OCB literature, J. Appl. Psychol., 92, 555, 10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.555 · DOI
  37. Harari, 2016, Creative and innovative performance: A meta-analysis of the relationship with task, citizenship, and counterproductive job performance dimensions, Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol., 25, 495, 10.1080/1359432X.2015.1134491 · DOI
  38. Gore, 2012, Personality Traits that Predict Academic Citizenship Behavior, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 42, 2433, 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00948.x · DOI
  39. Carpenter, 2017, Are counterproductive work behaviour and withdrawal empirically distinct? A meta-analytic investigation, J. Manag., 43, 834
  40. Dalal, 2005, A Meta-analysis of the Relationship between Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Counterproductive Work Behavior, J. Appl. Psychol., 90, 1241, 10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1241 · DOI
  41. Kuncel, N.R. (2003). The Prediction and Structure of Academic Performance. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota].
  42. DeRosier, 2011, The Impact of Children’s Social Adjustment on Academic Outcomes, Read. Writ. Q., 27, 25, 10.1080/10573569.2011.532710 · DOI
  43. Hanks, 2012, Differential Prediction of Preparatory and Performance Self-Efficacy Judgments, Hum. Perform., 25, 318, 10.1080/08959285.2012.703731 · DOI
  44. LeBlanc, P.H. (2005, January 17). The Relationship between Attendance and Grades in the College Classroom. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of the International Academy of Business Disciplines, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  45. McNeal, 2014, Parent involvement, academic achievement and the role of student attitudes and behaviors as mediators, Univ. J. Educ. Res., 2, 564
  46. Schmitt, 2008, Perceived fit with an academic environment: Attitudinal and behavioral outcomes, J. Vocat. Behav., 72, 317, 10.1016/j.jvb.2007.10.007 · DOI
  47. Thompson, 2004, Academic aptitude and prior knowledge as predictors of student achievement in introduction to psychology, J. Educ. Psychol., 96, 778, 10.1037/0022-0663.96.4.778 · DOI
  48. Schmidt, F.L., and Hunter, J.E. (2015). Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings, Sage. · DOI · Paper page
  49. Browne, 1975, Predictive Validity of a Linear Regression Equation, Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol., 28, 79, 10.1111/j.2044-8317.1975.tb00550.x · DOI
  50. Watson, 2013, The value of suppressor effects in explicating the construct validity of symptom measures, Psychol. Assess., 25, 929, 10.1037/a0032781 · DOI · Paper page
  51. MacKinnon, 2002, A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects, Psychol. Methods, 7, 83, 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.83 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Tofighi, 2011, RMediation: An R package for mediation analysis confidence intervals, Behav. Res. Methods, 43, 692, 10.3758/s13428-011-0076-x · DOI · Paper page
  53. Hurtz, 2000, Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited, J. Appl. Psychol., 85, 869, 10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.869 · DOI
  54. Organ, 1995, A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior, Personal. Psychol., 48, 775, 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1995.tb01781.x · DOI
  55. Sims, 1993, The relationship between academic dishonesty and unethical business practices, J. Educ. Bus., 68, 207, 10.1080/08832323.1993.10117614 · DOI
  56. McCabe, 2005, Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective, Int. J. Educ. Integr., 1, 1, 10.21913/IJEI.v1i1.14 · DOI
  57. Rettinger, 2004, Evaluating the motivation of other students to cheat: A vignette experiment, Res. High. Educ., 45, 873, 10.1007/s11162-004-5952-0 · DOI
  58. Smyth, 2004, Perceptions of dishonesty among two-year college students: Academic versus business situations, J. Bus. Ethics, 51, 63, 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000032347.79241.3c · DOI
  59. Witherspoon, 2012, Undergraduates and academic dishonesty, Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci., 3, 76
  60. Christiansen, 2005, Reconsidering Forced-Choice Item Formats for Applicant Personality Assessment, Hum. Perform., 18, 267, 10.1207/s15327043hup1803_4 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Jackson, 2000, The impact of faking on employment tests: Does forced choice offer a solution?, Hum. Perform., 13, 371, 10.1207/S15327043HUP1304_3 · DOI · Paper page
  62. McAbee, 2013, The criterion-related validity of personality measures for predicting GPA: A meta-analytic validity competition, Psychol. Assess., 25, 532, 10.1037/a0031748 · DOI
  63. Trapmann, 2007, Meta-analysis of the relationship between the Big Five and academic success at university, J. Psychol., 215, 132
  64. Ozer, 1985, Correlation and the coefficient of determination, Psychol. Bull., 97, 307, 10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.307 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 37

Metadata

Authors
Cuadrado, D., Salgado, J. F., & Moscoso, S.
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-10-31
Volume
11
Issue
21
Pages
6062
ISSN
2071-1050
DOI
10.3390/su11216062
Cited by
37
References
8
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (PSI2017-87603-P)

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