What Prevents Students from Reporting Academic Misconduct? A Survey of Croatian Students

Don't be a rat: An investigation of the taboo against reporting other students for cheating

This research examines barriers to reporting academic dishonesty in early adulthood (Study 1; N = 92) and adolescence (Study 2; N = 137). Participants were asked to describe a recent time they observed a peer cheating and to reflect on their decision about whether to report the cheating. They also responded to hypothetical scenarios about observing typical cheating actions, and the presence of social motives (e.g., whether people who report tend to gain reputations for being snitches) was manipulated in each scenario. Even though participants judged reporting to be the morally right thing to do, doing so was rare and approval for it was low, especially in adolescence. Participants also tended to say they would rather be friends with people who do not report cheaters than with those who do. Participants reasoned about a variety of social concerns to support their judgments about reporting (e.g., concern about their relationship with the cheater, concerns for others' welfare), and the manipulated social motives in the hypothetical scenarios significantly influenced judgments about reporting. These findings inform our understanding of the social dynamics that contribute to decisions about policing academic honesty.

Self-Reported Academic Misconduct among Medical Students: Perception and Prevalence

Academic integrity is the basis of an education system and must be taught as an ethical behavior during academic training. Students who reflect honesty and truthfulness during the academic years are more likely to follow this path, develop professional integrity, and thus become responsible and dependable professionals. Here, we determine the prevalence of academic lapses among medical students by a cross-sectional descriptive survey based on a self-assessment questionnaire. Students' perception of 37 behaviors comprising five domains, plagiarism, indolence, cheating, disruptive behavior, and falsifying data, were explored. A high percentage of students (83%) indicated that all 37 behaviors constitute misconduct. Approximately 65% of students thought that their fellow students were involved in dishonest behaviors, and 34% answered that they were indulged in some form of misconduct. Content analysis identified some prevalent behaviors such as doing work for another student (82.5%), getting information from the students who already took the exam (82.5%), copying the answer from neighbors (79%), and marking attendance for absent friends (74.5%). Multiple regression analysis points out that future indulgence in a behavior is significantly (p ≤ 0.5) correlated with understanding a behavior as wrong, perceiving that others do it and whether one has already indulged in it. This study can serve as a diagnostic tool to analyze the prevalence of misconduct and a foothold to develop the medical school system's ethical guidelines.

Solidarity in Academia and its Relationship to Academic Integrity

This paper provides the theoretical analysis of forms of solidarity in academia and its relationship to academic integrity. This analysis is inspired by the Guidelines for an Institutional Code of Ethics in Higher Education drawn up by the International Association of Universities and the Magna Charta Observatory. These Guidelines refer to the principle of solidarity in the context of international cooperation between higher education institutions. However, the author of this paper believes that this principle might also be used in a broader academic context, in particular, in the field of academic ethics and academic integrity. Therefore, this paper aims at revealing the relevance of solidarity in academia and argues that the principle of solidarity can be considered as one of fundamental principles of academic ethics and should be reflected in the structure and provisions of the codes of academic ethics (conduct). For this purpose the author explores the philosophical and sociological approaches towards solidarity and defines the concept of academic solidarity, discusses the conceptual connection between academic solidarity, ethics and integrity and illustrates the impact of solidarity on the development of academic integrity. This analysis allows the author of the paper to recommend embedding the principle of solidarity in the codes of academic ethics of higher education institutions as well as extending the scope of its application by linking the rights and responsibilities of different groups within the academic community in a way that best expresses their unity, shared responsibility, mutual support in meeting the standards of social ethos.

Students’ Reasoning About Whether to Report When Others Cheat: Conflict, Confusion, and Consequences

Nearly all students believe academic cheating is wrong, yet few students say they would report witnessed acts of cheating. To explain this apparent tension, the present research examined college students’ reasoning about whether to report plagiarism or other forms of cheating. Study 1 examined students’ conflicts when deciding whether to report cheating. Most students gave reasons against reporting a peer (e.g., social and physical consequences, a lack of responsibility to report) as well as reasons in favor of reporting (e.g., concerns about welfare, justice, and fairness). Study 2 provided experimental confirmation that the contextual factors referenced by Study 1 participants in fact influenced decisions about whether to report cheating. Overall, the findings indicate that students often decide against reporting peers’ acts of cheating, though not due to a lack of concern about integrity. Rather, students may refrain from reporting because of conflicting concerns, lack of information about school policy, and perceived better alternatives to reporting.

Good friend or good student? An interview study of perceived conflicts between personal and academic integrity among students in three European countries

Students are often reluctant to report the academic dishonesty of their peers. Loyalty to friends and classmates has previously been identified as an important reason for this. This paper explores loyalty conflicts among students from upper secondary school, through bachelor's, to Ph.D. level. Drawing on semi-structured qualitative interviews (N = 72) conducted in Denmark, Ireland and Hungary, we show that loyalty considerations among students can be complex and draw on a range of norms including responsibility. The study demonstrates how students are often willing to assume substantial personal responsibility for dealing with the academic dishonesty of a peer, often preferring this to reporting. However, when deciding on the right course of action, they also perceive tensions between the norms of the good researcher and student and their own norms of being a good friend and person. The loyalty considerations and tension were identified in all three countries and across the educational levels, which suggests that this is a cross-cultural challenge. We argue that institutions should formally decide whether they want students to take some degree of responsibility themselves for addressing less serious cases of academic dishonesty and communicate their decision to their students.