CC BY
16УДК 37
Adbykhalyk S.N.
Astana IT University (Astana, Kazakhstan)
Abdullin A.T.
Astana IT University (Astana, Kazakhstan)
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CHEATING IN HIGHER EDUCATION: UNDERSTANDING THE MOTIVATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Abstract: cheating in higher education institutions is a pervasive and complex issue that has garnered increasing attention in recent years. This article delves into the psychology of cheating, aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of the motivations and implications that drive students to engage in academic dishonesty. As academic integrity is a fundamental pillar of the educational system, it is crucial to explore the psychological underpinnings of cheating behaviors in order to develop effective preventive measures and support mechanisms.
This research synthesizes findings from various psychological and educational studies to shed light on the multifaceted factors that contribute to cheating. The motivations for academic dishonesty, which encompass both intrinsic and extrinsic factors, are analyzed in detail. We examine the role of societal pressures, competition, fear offailure, and the impact of digital technologies in shaping students' decisions to cheat.
The research contributes to the ongoing discourse on academic integrity in higher education by offering valuable insights into the motivations behind students' unethical behaviors. Despite the inherent limitations, the study provides a foundation for educators, administrators, and policymakers to develop evidence-based strategies for addressing and preventing academic dishonesty. The nuanced understanding gained from this research emphasizes the importance offostering a culture of integrity and ethical conduct within educational institutions.
Keywords: cheating higher education, psychology, integrity, dishonesty.
Introduction. The pursuit of knowledge and the development of academic skills are critical in higher education. However, these admirable objectives have been overshadowed by the unpleasant practice of academic dishonesty, which is often referred to as cheating. "Cheating is a complex phenomenon with multiple causes, including academic pressure, fear of failure, and a lack of ethical awareness" (Johnson & McCabe, 2018, p. 1). Academic institutions are seriously threatened by students who use illegal methods to achieve success, such as copying during exams, plagiarizing, or getting unauthorized help. In order to better understand the psychology of cheating in higher education, as well as its motivations and effects, this article explores the complicated world of cheating in higher education and offers more practical prevention and intervention techniques.
Academic dishonesty is not a new phenomenon. However, it has changed recently because of the development of technology and the changing nature of education. Academic science has faced opportunities and challenges in the contemporary era. With the growth of digital technologies and the Internet, information is now more accessible than ever. While these funds improved education, they also created more opportunities for dishonest work. "Institutions can take a number of steps to reduce cheating, such as implementing clear academic integrity policies, providing resources to help students succeed, and creating a culture of honesty and ethical behavior" (Green & Reid, 2018, p. 15). A student has instant access to a vast amount of material, such as finished essays, assignment solutions, and even the content of exam tasks. The ease of use of digital communication also plays a role in students' illegal involvement. Furthermore, there is increasing pressure on students. As competition in higher education increases, students may resort to dishonest methods to maintain a competitive edge. Fear of failure, societal expectations and relentless pursuit of high grades push some of them to unethical behaviors.
The primary objective of this study is a thorough study and understanding of the motives that compel students to academic dishonesty in higher education. By solving this issue, we strive to identify the underlying factors that influence the decision of students to cheat both in the classroom and outside it. The expected outcomes
include a subtle analysis of internal and external motivators, understanding the impact of digital technologies, considering gender and cultural influences. In addition, the study will identify systemic factors that may inadvertently contribute to fraud. Ultimately, the results of this study will contribute to the development of targeted strategies and measures aimed at preventing academic dishonesty and the formation of a culture of academic honesty in higher education.
To reveal the complex motives that encourage students to cheat at a higher educational institution, this study uses quantitative research design, with the focus on a comprehensive survey of university students. This methodology was chosen because it allows us to collect quantitative data on a large scale, which provides valuable information about the prevalence and patterns of academic dishonesty.
Main part. This study uses a quantitative research method using a structured questionnaire to systematically study the motives that encourage students to academic dishonesty in the higher education system. The research approach is cross-sectional, which allows you to get an idea of the behavior and motives of cheating students at a particular time. This approach allows us to collect numerical data that can be subjected to statistical analysis to identify patterns, relationships and prevalence indicators associated with academic dishonesty.
It should be noted that there are certain limitations, even if the study's design and methodology were thoroughly considered to pinpoint the causes of academic dishonesty. The study is susceptible to social desirability bias due to its reliance on self-reported data. Participants may minimize their involvement in academic dishonesty due to the sensitive nature of the topic, which could underestimate the genuine prevalence of this phenomenon. Furthermore, since the study is cross-sectional, you can obtain a brief view of the actions linked to dishonesty. This constraint prevents us from studying changes in motives over an extended period or from drawing conclusions regarding cause-and-effect linkages. It is important to exercise caution when interpreting the results, as they represent a single instance in the ever-changing environment of academic dishonesty. To ensure the diversity of the contingent of participants, a stratified random sampling strategy was applied. However,
the generality of the results may be limited. Differences in institutional policy, cultural context and academic environment at different universities may limit the broad applicability of the research results.
Participants. The participants in the research are university students chosen using a stratified random sampling approach. This method guarantees representing the variety of student experiences and motivations is the aim. The study utilized online interaction to recruit participants. Upon invitation to join, participants receive comprehensive details regarding the goals and protocols of the research. Every subject provides informed consent, and participation in the study is completely optional.
Data collection tool. The survey was conducted electronically using a secure online platform to ensure efficient and confidential data collection. Participants receive a link to the survey and clear instructions. The survey will be open for a certain period, which will allow participants to have a flexible approach to filling it out. The combination of closed and open questions allows you to get a complete set of data that allows you to conduct both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
To find out the factors that encourage students to engage in academic dishonesty in higher education institution, 82 participants took part in a survey that included the following questions:
Identify your gender.
Identify your age.
Have you ever engaged in cheating (e.g., plagiarism, copying, unauthorized assistance) in an academic setting?
If you have cheated, how frequently have you cheated in the past year?
Have you ever cheated in an online course or assessment?
When you have cheated, what was the primary reason for doing so?
How important is achieving a high grade to you?
Do you believe that your peers engage in cheating to a significant extent?
Do you believe that cheating in academics is morally wrong?
To what extent do you agree with the statement: "The academic system encourages cheating"?
How often do you feel stressed due to your academic workload?
Do you feel that cheating helps alleviate academic stress?
Have your friends or classmates ever encouraged you to cheat?
Have you ever cheated because you felt pressured to do so by peers or friends?
Do you feel that faculty and institutions are taking sufficient measures to prevent fraud for instructional purposes?
Data analysis. Quantitative data acquired through closed-ended questions was statistically analyzed thoroughly. Key features of the dataset, such as the frequency of different kinds of fraudulent activity and demographic traits, was summed together using descriptive statistics. Regression models and correlation analysis are two examples of differential statistical techniques that will be used to find links and associations in the data. The findings offer a quantitative comprehension of the incentives behind academic dishonesty among students.
Results. The exploration of cheating behavior in higher education, particularly within the realm of Computer Science and Engineering, is an essential endeavor for both educators and institutions. In unraveling the complex dynamics surrounding academic dishonesty, this study employs a strategic approach to present the survey results. Recognizing the multifaceted nature of the data, the results section is deliberately organized into six distinct subsections.
Each subsection serves as a targeted lens through which we dissect critical aspects of the survey findings. By starting with a demographic overview, we lay the foundation, providing context about the composition of the respondent pool. This introductory section allows for a nuanced understanding of potential demographic influences on cheating behaviors. Subsequent subsections delve into specific facets, such as engagement in cheating behavior, motivations for cheating, attitudes towards academic integrity, and the impact of academic stress. By segregating the results into these focused categories, we aim to offer a comprehensive and detailed exploration of the survey data.
Demographic overview. Out of the 82 respondents, 47.6% identified as female, 45.1% as male, and 7.3% chose not to specify their gender. In terms of age, 63.4%
were in the 18-24 age group, 20.7% were in the 25-34 age group, 9.8% were under 18, 4.9% were in the 35-44 age group, and 1.2% were 45 or older.
Cheating Behaviour. A significant portion of respondents, 82.9%, admitted to engaging in some form of cheating. Regarding frequency in the past year, 2.4% claimed to have never cheated, 24.4% rarely cheated (1-2 times), 34.1% occasionally cheated (3-5 times), and 39% reported cheating often (more than 5 times). Additionally, 85.4% of respondents admitted to cheating in online courses or assessments, while 14.6% claimed not to have cheated in online settings.
Motivations for Cheating. The primary motivations for cheating varied. Lack of time (45.1%), fear of failure (59.8%), pressure to perform well (63.4%), lack of understanding of the material (39%), and a competitive academic environment (32.9%) emerged as significant factors.
Attitudes Towards Cheating. Respondents rated the importance of achieving a high grade on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 being not at all important and 5 being extremely important. The distribution was as follows: 1 - 4.9%, 2 - 2.4%, 3 - 15.9%, 4 - 58.5%, and 5 - 18.3%. In terms of perception of peer cheating, 41.5% believed many of their peers engage in cheating, 50% believed some of them do, 6.1% believed very few of them do, and 2.4% believed none of them do.
Academic Stress and Well-being. Concerning academic stress, 18.3% felt very frequently stressed, 52.4% felt stressed frequently, 14.6% felt stressed occasionally, 9.8% felt stressed rarely, and 4.9% claimed never to feel stressed. Regarding the belief that cheating helps alleviate academic stress, 45.1% agreed, 27.4% disagreed, and various responses included "possibly," "maybe," or "more yes than no." In terms of peer influence, 70.7% reported friends or classmates encouraging them to cheat, and 29.3% claimed not to have experienced such encouragement. Additionally, 61% admitted to cheating due to pressure from peers, while 39% claimed not to have cheated.
Attitudes Towards Institutional Measures. Respondents rated the perceived effectiveness of institutional measures to prevent fraud on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1
being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agreeing. The distribution was as follows: 1 - 12.2%, 2 - 19.5%, 3 - 17.1%, 4 - 45.1%, and 5 - 6.1%.
Discussion. The analysis of demographic aspects discloses captivating trends in dishonest acts within particular communities. The demographic overview emphasizes that gender and age could have substantial impacts on the occurrence and underlying motivations of academic deceit. Deciphering these influences can steer customized interventions and aid mechanisms, which would address the distinct obstacles encountered by various segments of the student populace.
The noteworthy occurrence of academic dishonesty, as evidenced by 82.9% of participants confessing to engaging in various forms of cheating, necessitates immediate consideration. Understanding the modes and frequencies of cheating sheds light on the evolving dynamics of student behavior, especially in the increasingly digital landscape of Computer Science and Engineering education. This insight is crucial for educators and institutions seeking to adapt strategies that align with contemporary challenges.
The motivations for cheating are diverse, with time constraints, fear of failure, and pressure to perform well emerging as prominent factors. Recognizing these drivers is pivotal for educators and institutions seeking to address the root causes of academic dishonesty and implement targeted preventive measures. By acknowledging and understanding these motivations, interventions can be developed to provide effective alternatives and support mechanisms.
Respondents' attitudes toward cheating, including the importance placed on high grades and perceptions of peer behavior, provide a rich understanding of the prevailing academic culture. Addressing misconceptions and fostering a culture of academic integrity requires a nuanced approach that considers these varied perspectives. Educational institutions can leverage this understanding to cultivate an environment that promotes ethical conduct and discourages academic dishonesty.
The intersection of academic stress and cheating behavior reveals a delicate balance. While stress is a common aspect of higher education, its association with cheating raises questions about the well-being of students. Strategies to mitigate stress
and promote mental health may concurrently contribute to a reduction in academic dishonesty. A holistic approach to student well-being, including mental health support services, can be integrated into educational frameworks.
Perceptions of institutional measures to prevent fraud highlight an area of potential improvement. With only 6.1% strongly agreeing that sufficient measures are in place, institutions may need to reassess and enhance their strategies to uphold academic integrity effectively. This suggests an opportunity for collaboration between students and institutions to co-create and refine measures that are both effective and perceived as such.
By integrating findings across these subsections, a holistic understanding of academic dishonesty in Computer Science and Engineering education emerges. It is evident that combating cheating requires a multifaceted approach, considering demographic influences, motivations, attitudes, and the broader educational environment. This comprehensive perspective is essential for developing targeted interventions that address the specific challenges within this academic domain.
The implications of these findings extend beyond understanding academic dishonesty to informing practical interventions. Educators and institutions can use this information to tailor preventive measures, foster a culture of integrity, and provide targeted support to at-risk student groups. Further research could delve into the effectiveness of specific interventions and explore additional factors influencing cheating behavior. In conclusion, this discussion serves as a starting point for a more profound exploration of academic dishonesty within the unique context of Computer Science and Engineering education. The results and subsequent analysis pave the way for informed decision-making, ultimately contributing to the creation of ethical learning environments that nurture academic integrity.
Conclusion. The prevalence of academic dishonesty poses a persistent challenge to academic institutions, which are founded on the principles of knowledge acquisition and skill development. The digital era has brought about both opportunities and challenges, as it has democratized information accessibility. While technological
advancements enhance education, they also create an environment that is conducive to dishonest practices that undermine the credibility of academic institutions.
To address this issue, a quantitative research design was utilized in this study to capture a snapshot of students' behaviors and motives. The study aimed to explore the complex interplay of factors that influence students' unethical behaviors. The cross-sectional approach facilitated a systematic analysis of prevalent patterns, but limitations such as social desirability bias and the inability to track long-term changes must be considered.
Despite these constraints, the study's stratified random sampling aimed for diverse representation. However, variations in institutional policies, cultural contexts, and academic environments may impact the broad applicability of the findings. The survey, conducted electronically with a secure online platform, gathered a rich set of data through a mix of closed and open-ended questions.
Quantitative analysis, including descriptive statistics, regression models, and correlation analysis, provided valuable insights into the factors influencing academic dishonesty. The study's outcomes contribute to the development of targeted strategies and measures for preventing academic dishonesty, fostering a culture of honesty within higher education. The backdrop of evolving education, driven by technological advancements and heightened competitive pressures, underscores the urgency of understanding and addressing cheating.
As institutions grapple with the challenge of preserving academic integrity, unraveling the intricate psychology behind cheating becomes crucial. Educators and policymakers can use these insights to work towards cultivating ethical learning environments, ultimately nurturing a culture of academic honesty within higher education.
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ:
1. Bouville, M. (2010). Why is cheating wrong? Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29, 67-76.;
2. Bushway, A., & Nash, W. R. (1977). School cheating behavior. Review of Educational Research, 47(4), 623-632.;
3. Davis, S. F., Drinan, P. F., & Gallant, T. B. (2011). Cheating in school: What we know and what we can do. John Wiley & Sons.;
4. Green, M. C., & Reid, J. M. (2018). Cheating in higher education: A review of the literature and recommendations for prevention. Handbook of cheating research, 2346.
5. Harkins, A. M., & Kubik, G. H. (2010). "Ethical" cheating in formal education. On the Horizon, 18(2), 138-146.;
6. Harper, M. G. (2006). High tech cheating. Nurse Education Today, 26(8), 672679.;
7. Johnson, S. L., & McCabe, D. L. (2018). The psychology of cheating in higher education: Understanding the motivations and implications. Handbook of cheating research, pp. 1-22.;
8. Josien, L., & Broderick, B. (2013). Cheating in higher education: The case of multi-methods cheaters. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 17(3), 93.;
9. Srikanth, M., & Asmatulu, R. (2014). Modern cheating techniques, their adverse effects on engineering education and preventions. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education, 42(2), 129-140.;
10. Trushell, J., Byrne, K., & Simpson, R. (2012). Cheating behaviours, the internet and education undergraduate students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 136-145.
