Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural Differences in Academic Dishonesty: A Social Learning Perspective

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we examined the role of social learning theory in explaining academic dishonesty among 673 college students in the United States, France, and Greece. We found support for social learning theory such that perceived peer dishonesty was incrementally valid as a predictor of self-reported academic dishonesty across three countries beyond personal factor of conscientiousness and demographic factor of age. Contrary to expectation, perceived penalty for academic cheating received support in the U.S. sample only. Justification for academic dishonesty contributed incremental variance after controlling for other factors including age, conscientiousness, perceived penalty for cheating and peer dishonesty across three countries. In addition, cultural differences accounted for almost 50% of the explained variance in academic dishonesty with French students reportedly engaged in significantly more academic cheating behavior than Greek and U.S. students. Discussion and implications for business ethics teaching and research were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Note that it is chronological age, not academic standing (e.g., freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, undergraduate vs. graduate) that predicts academic cheating because more senior, higher level students engaged in about the same frequency of academic dishonesty as lower level ones (Whitley 1998).

  2. Non-significant t-test results were obtained in demographic variables between students who provided complete data and those with missing data for the French and Greek samples.

References

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akers, R. L. (1985). Deviant behavior: A social learning approach. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ariely, D. (2012). The honest truth about dishonesty. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazana, P. G., & Stelmack, R. M. (2004). Stability of Personality Across the Life Span: A Meta-Analysis. In R. M. Stelmack (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman, 113–144)

  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. NJ: Englewood Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanism of moral disengagement. In W. Reich (Ed.), Origin of terrorism: Psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind (pp. 161–191). Cambridge

  • Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual review of psychology, 52, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bing, M. N., Davison, H. K., Vitell, S. J., Ammeter, A. P., Garner, B. L., & Novicevic, M. M. (2012). An experimental investigation of an interactive model of academic cheating among business school students. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11, 28–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1986). The wording and translation of research instruments. In W. J. Lonner & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Field methods in cross-cultural research (pp. 137–164). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett, A. J., Enyeart Smith, T. M., & Wessel, M. T. (2016). Use of the Social Cognitive Theory to Frame University Students’ Perceptions of Cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14, 49–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carl, D., Vipin, G., & Mansour, J. (2004). Power distance. In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 513–563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chudzicka-Czupała, A., Grabowski, D., Mello, A. L., Kuntz, J., Zaharia, D. V., Hapon, N., & Börü, D. (2016). Application of the theory of planned behavior in academic cheating research–cross-cultural comparison. Ethics & Behavior, 26, 638–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Detert, J. R., Treviño, L. K., & Sweitzer, V. L. (2008). Moral disengagement in ethical decision making: A study of antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 374–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly, A.H. (1995). The science and politics of comparing women and men. American Psychologist, 50, 145-158.

  • Fell, C. B., & König, C. J. (2020). Examining Cross-cultural differences in Academic faking in 41 nations. Applied Psychology: An international Review, 69, 444–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gentina, E., & Tang, T.L.- P., & Gu, Q. . (2017). Does Bad Company Corrupt Good Morals? Social Bonding and Academic Cheating among French and Chinese Teens. Journal of Business Ethics, 146, 639–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giluk, T. L., & Postlethwaite, B. E. (2015). Big five personality and academic dishonesty: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Individual Differences, 72, 59–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, I., Michalska, A., & Orim, S-M. (2013). Plagiarism policies in France. Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education across Europe. Retrieved from http://plagiarism.cz/ippheae/files/D2-3-11%20FR%20RT%20IPPHEAE%20CU%20Survey%20FranceNarrative.pdf on January 7, 2019.

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimes, P. W. (2004). Dishonesty in academics and business: A cross-cultural evaluations of student attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 49, 273–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guibert, P., & Michaut, C. (2009). Les facteurs individuels et contextuels de la fraude aux examens universitaires. Revue française de pédagogie, 169, 43–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harding, T. S., Mayhew, M. J., Finelli, C. J., & Carpenter, D. D. (2007). The theory of planned behavior as a model of academic dishonesty in engineering and humanities undergraduates. Ethics & Behavior, 17, 255–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, L., Harrison, D., McNally, D., & Ford, C. (2019). Academic Integrity in an Online Culture: Do McCabe’s Findings Hold True for Online, Adult Learners? Journal of Academic Ethics, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-019-09335-3

  • Hayes, N., & Introna, L. D. (2005). Cultural Values, Plagiarism, and Fairness: When Plagiarism Gets in the Way of Learning. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 213–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendy, N. T., & Biderman, M. D. (2019). Using bifactor model of personality to predict academic performance and dishonesty. International Journal of Management Education, 17, 294–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendy, N. T., & Montargot, N. (2019). Understanding academic dishonesty among business school students in France using the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Management Education, 17, 85–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendy, N. T. (2017). Forced-choice personality measures and academic dishonesty: A comparative study. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15, 293–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hess, M. F., Trevino, L. K., Chen, A., & Cross, R. (2019). Beyond silence or compliance: The complexities of reporting a friend for misconduct. Business ethics: A European review, 28, 546–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2018, December 31). Hofstede Insights. Retrieved from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/france,greece,the-usa/

  • Hofstede, G. H. (1998). A case for comparing apples with oranges – International differences in values. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 39, 16–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1986). Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10, 301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., & Javidan, M. (2004). Overview of GLOBE. In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies (pp. 9–28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • IBM Corp. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows, Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.

  • Institute of International Education (2019). Open Door Report 2018. Retrieved from https://www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students/Places-of-Origin

  • Jordan, A. E. (2001). College student cheating: the role of motivation, perceived norms, attitudes, and knowledge of institutional policy. Ethics and Behavior, 11, 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karassavidou, E., & Glaveli, N. (2006). Towards the ethical or the unethical side? An explorative research of Greek business students’ attitudes. International Journal of Educational Management, 20, 348–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karassavidou, E., & Glaveli, N. (2007). Ethical orientations of future Greek businesspeople: is anomia responsible for deviant ethical attitudes? Business Ethics: A European Review, 16, 114–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokkinaki, A. (2013). Plagiarism policies in Greece. Impact of Policies for Plagiarism in Higher Education across Europe. Retrieved from http://plagiarism.cz/ippheae/files/D2-3-12%20GR%20RT%20IPPHEAE+UNIC+Survey+HellenicNarrative%20v.6%20(final).pdf on January 7, 2019.

  • Koljatic, M., & Silva, M. (2002). Comparison of Students’ and Faculty’s Perceptions of Occurrence of Dishonest Academic Behaviors. Psychological Reports, 90, 883–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koletsi-Kounari, H., Polychronopoulou, A., Reppa, C., & Teplitsky, P. E. (2011). Penalties for academic dishonesty in a Greek dental school environment. Journal of Dental Education, 75, 1383–1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lersch, K. M. (1999). Social learning theory and academic dishonesty. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 23, 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J. G., Quoidbach, J., Gino, F., Chakroff, A., Maddux, W. W., & Galinsky, A. D. (2017). The dark side of going abroad: How broad foreign experiences increase immoral behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology, 112, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, G. M., & Friedrich, J. (2005). Individual Differences in Workplace Deviance and Integrity as Predictors of Academic Dishonesty. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 15–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupton, R. A., Chapman, K. J., & Weiss, J. E. (2000). A cross-national exploration of business students’ attitudes, perceptions, and tendencies toward academic dishonesty. Journal of Education for Business, 75, 31–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D.L. (2001, Winter). Cheating: Why students do it and how we can help them stop. American Educator. Retrieved from http://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/winter-2001/cheating

  • McCabe, D. L., & Treviño, L. K. (1993). Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. Journal of Higher Education, 64, 522–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. D. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 219–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Treviño, L. K., & Butterfield, K. (2002). Honor codes and other contextual influences on academic integrity: A replication and extension of modified honor code settings. Research in Higher Education, 43, 357–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Academic dishonesty in graduate business programs: Prevalence, causes, and proposed action. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 5, 294–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKay, R., Cray, D., & Mittelman, R. (2019). We’re not in Kansas anymore: Academic honesty in an international business program. International Journal of Management Education, 17, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, A., Shoptaugh, C., & Wooldridge, J. (2011). Reasons not to cheat, academic-integrity responsibility, and frequency of cheating. Journal of Experimental Education, 79, 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudrack, P. E., & Mason, E. S. (2020). A relativistic approach to moral judgment in individuals: Review and reinterpretation. Business ethics: A European review, 29, 403–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NAFSA (2019). Trends in U.S. study abroad. Retrieved from https://www.nafsa.org/policy-and-advocacy/policy-resources/trends-us-study-abroad

  • Newstead, S. E., Franklyn-Stokes, A., & Armstead, P. (1996). Individual Differences in Student Cheating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 229–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, N. T., Basuray, M. T., Smith, W. P., Kopka, D., & McCulloh, D. (2008). Perception of business ethics: Does teaching make a difference? Journal of Education for Business, 84, 66–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niiya, Y., Ballantyne, R., North, M. S., & Crocker, J. (2008). Gender, contingencies of self-worth, and achievement goals as predictors of academic cheating in a controlled laboratory setting. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 30, 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonis, S., & Swift, C. (2001). An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: A multi-campus investigation. Journal of Education for Business, 77, 69–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2012). The Influence of Unethical Peer Behavior on Observers’ Unethical Behavior: A Social Cognitive Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 109, 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, F., Thomas, C. H., Novicevic, M. M., Ammeter, A., Garner, B., Johnson, P., & Popoola, I. (2018). Integrated Moral Conviction Theory of Student Cheating: An Empirical Test. Journal of Management Education, 42, 104–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. A., & Wasieleski, D. M. (2012). Moral reasoning in computer-based task environments: Exploring the interplay between cognitive and technological factors on individuals’ propensity to break rules. Journal of Business Ethics, 110, 355–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scrimpshire, A. J., Stone, T. H., Kisamore, J. L., & Jawahar, I. M. (2017). Do birds of a feather cheat together? How personality and relationships affect student cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics, 17, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seleim, A., & Bontis, N. (2009). The relationship between culture and corruption: A cross-national study. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 10, 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. (1993). The relationship between academic dishonesty and unethical business practices. Journal of Education for Business, 68, 207–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2009). Using the theory of planned behavior and cheating justifications to predict academic misconduct. Career Development International, 14, 221–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2010). Predicting academic misconduct intentions and behavior using the theory of planned behavior and personality. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 35–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taras, V., & Steel, P. (2009). Beyond Hofstede: Challenging the ten testaments of cross-cultural research. In C. Nakata (Ed.), Beyond Hofstede: Culture frameworks for global marketing and management (pp. 40–61). Chicago, IL: Macmillan/Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Taras, V., Steel, P., & Kirkman, B. L. (2012). Improving national cultural indices using a longitudinal meta-analysis of Hofstede’s dimensions. Journal of World Business, 47, 329–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tormo-Carbó, G., Oltra, V., Klimkiewicz, K., & Seguí-Mas, E. (2019). “Don’t try to teach me, I got nothing to learn”: Management students’ perceptions of business ethics teaching. Business Ethics: A European Review, 28, 506–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trost, K. (2009). Psst, have you ever cheated? A study of academic dishonesty in Sweden. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 34, 367–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. P. Y., & Ngo, H. Y. (2016). Social predictors of business student cheating behavior in Chinese societies. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14, 281–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39, 235–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E., Jr., Nelson, A. B., & Jones, C. J. (1999). Gender differences in cheating attitudes and classroom cheating behavior: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, 41, 657–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K. M., Nathanson, C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2010). Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: Their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 293–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, S. C. (2012). Attitudes and Behaviors related to academic dishonesty: A survey of Taiwanese graduate students. Ethics and Behavior, 22, 218–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., & Yin, H. (2020). Collaborative cheating among Chinese college students: the effects of peer influence and Individualism-Collectivism orientations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 45, 54–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, Towson University, 8000 York Road, Towson, MD, 21252, USA

    Nhung T. Hendy

  2. Departement of Human Resources and Management, Excelia Business School, 102 rue de Coureilles – Les Minimes, 17024, La Rochelle Cedex 1, France

    Nathalie Montargot

  3. School of Education, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, 21218, USA

    Antigoni Papadimitriou

Authors
  1. Nhung T. Hendy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nathalie Montargot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antigoni Papadimitriou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nhung T. Hendy.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hendy, N.T., Montargot, N. & Papadimitriou, A. Cultural Differences in Academic Dishonesty: A Social Learning Perspective. J Acad Ethics 19, 49–70 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09391-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09391-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation