Abstract
AbstractContract cheating – students outsourcing assignments to ghost-writers and submitting it as their own – is an issue facing tertiary education institutions globally. Approximately 3% to 11% of higher education students may engage on contract cheating. Understanding why nearly 90% of students do not engage in contract cheating is as important as understanding why other students do, as it can aid in the development of effective interventions and policies. This study addressed limitations in previous research and built upon a measure of Reasons for Not Contract Cheating (RNCC). In this study, 403 university students participated in an online survey consisting of a revised version of the Reasons for Not Contract Cheating measure (RNCC-R) and measures of psychological individual differences, such as the dark triad personality traits, self-control, and autonomy. Two higher-order factors and six sub-factors were identified in the RNCC-R, which included some similarities to the original RNCC. The findings from this study demonstrate the importance of psychological individual differences, such as satisfaction of the need for autonomy, grit (perseverance of effort), and Machiavellianism, in predicting the reasons why students do not engage in contract cheating. Consistent with previous research, this study provides support for the importance of students’ motivation for learning, and their perceived morals and norms, as reasons for not engaging in contract cheating. It additionally provides evidence of the importance of the academic environment, such as respect for academic staff, as a reason why students do not engage in contract cheating.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Education
Reference51 articles.
1. Awdry R, Newton PM (2019) Staff views on commercial contract cheating in higher education: a survey study in Australia and the UK. High Educ 78(4):593–610. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00360-0
2. Barbaranelli C, Farnese ML, Tramontano C, Fida R, Ghezzi V, Paciello M, Long P. (2018) Machiavellian ways to academic cheating: a mediational and interactional model. Front Psychol, 9(695). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00695
3. Birkás B, Csathó Á, Gács B, Bereczkei T (2015) Nothing ventured nothing gained: strong associations between reward sensitivity and two measures of Machiavellianism. Pers Indiv Differ 74:112–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.09.046
4. Bretag T, Harper R, Burton M, Ellis C, Newton P, Rozenberg P, Saddiqui S, van Haeringen K (2019) Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university students. Stud High Educ 44(11):1837–1856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788
5. Clarke R, Lancaster T (2006) Eliminating the successor to plagiarism: Identifying the usage of contract cheating sites [Paper presentation]. 2nd International Plagiarism Conference, Gateshead
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献