Development and Testing of a Test to Measure Unethical Academic Behavior of Students

The modern psychological literature presents several approaches to measuring ethical attitudes in young people. This indicates the prospects for the development of measurement tests and the accumulation of empirical data on their application. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate the results of a test measuring students’ attitudes toward unethical academic behavior. This test is the first stage in creating a set of measurements that will allow us to record changes in attitudes toward ethical standards, assess the ability to ethically reason, and predict the likelihood of ethically risky behavior. Based on existing experience, a 40-question test has been developed to measure student unethical academic behavior (UAB). The study received questionnaires from 184 respondents (age range: 18 to 24 years). Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, discriminativity index, and analysis of medial values were used to process and analyze the data. Testing of the questionnaire showed its validity (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for 37 questions was 0.8) and allowed for post-hoc analysis.

1. Dremova O. V., Maloshonok N. G., Terentiev E. A. V poiskakh spravedlivosti v universitete: kritika i opravdanie praktik akademicheskogo moshennichestva studentami [Seeking Justice in Academia: Criticism and Justification of Student Academic Dishonesty] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Monitoring obshchestvennogo mneniya: ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny = Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes Journal, 2020, no. 4, pp. 366–394. doi:10.14515/monitoring.2020.4.972 (In Russ.).
2. Maloshonok N. Kak vospriyatie akademicheskoi chestnosti sredy universiteta vzaimosvyazano so studencheskoi vovlechennost’yu: vozmozhnosti kontseptualizatsii i empiricheskogo izucheniya [How Perception of Academic Honesty at the University Linked with Student Engagement: Conceptualization and Empirical Research Opportunities] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies Moscow, 2016, no. 1, pp. 35–60. doi:10.17323/1814-9545-2016-1-35-60 (In Russ.).
3. Sagitov E.B., Shmeleva E.D. Kak pedagogicheskie praktiki svyazany so spisyvaniem sredi studentov rossiiskikh vuzov [How Are Pedagogical Practices Associated with Cheating among Students of Russian Universities] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Voprosy obrazovaniya = Educational Studies Moscow, 2022, no. 1, pp. 138–159. doi:10.17323/1814-9545-2022-1-138-159 (In Russ.).
4. Shmeleva E.D., Sagitov E.B. Spisyvanie i plagiat: ustanovki studentov i reaktsiya prepodavatelei: informatsionnyi byulleten’. Moscow: NIU VShE Publ., 2022. 40 p. (In Russ.).
5. Awdry R., Ives B. International Predictors of Contract Cheating in Higher Education. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2023. Vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 193–212. doi:10.1007/s10805-022-09449-1
6. Berry C.M., Carpenter N.C., Barratt C.L. Do other-reports of counterproductive work behavior provide an incremental contribution over self-reports? A meta-analytic comparison. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2012. Vol. 97, no. 3, pp. 613–636. doi:10.1037/a0026739
7. Biggs D.A., Colesante R.J. The Moral Competence Test: An examination of validity for samples in the United States. Journal of Moral Education, 2015. Vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 497–515. doi:10.1080/03057240.2015.1087390
8. Borenstein J., Drake M.J., Kirkman R., Swann J.L. The Engineering and Science Issues Test (ESIT): A Discipline-Specific Approach to Assessing Moral Judgment. Science and Engineering Ethics, 2010. Vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 387–407. doi:10.1007/s11948-009-9148-z
9. Clarkeburn H.A. Test for Ethical Sensitivity in Science. Journal of Moral Education, 2002. Vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 439–453. doi:10.1080/0305724022000029662
10. Clinciu A.I., Cazan A.-M., Ives B. Academic Dishonesty and Academic Adjustment Among the Students at University Level: An Exploratory Study. SAGE Open, 2021. Vol. 11, no. 2. doi:10.1177/21582440211021839
11. Cohen A., Diamant A. The role of justice perceptions in determining counterproductive work behaviors. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 2017. Vol. 30, no. 20, pp. 2901–2924. doi:10.1080/09585192.2017.1340321
12. Eaton S.E. Plagiarism in higher education: Tackling tough topics in academic integrity. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2021. 252 p.
13. Heitman E., Olsen C.H., Anestidou L., Bulger R.E. New Graduate Students Baseline Knowledge of the Re-sponsible Conduct of Research. Academic Medicine, 2007. Vol. 82, no. 9, pp. 838–845. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f7956
14. Helton-Fauth W. et al. A New Approach to Assessing Ethical Conduct in Scientific Work. Accountability in Research, 2003. Vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 205–228. doi:10.1080/714906104
15. Klein H.A., Levenburg N.M., McKendall M., Mothersell W.M. Cheating During the College Years: How do Business School Students Compare? Journal of Business Ethics, 2007. Vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 197–206. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9165-7
16. Kohlberg L. The psychology of moral development: the nature and validity of moral stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1984. 729 p.
17. Lind G. The Meaning and Measurement of Moral Judgment Competence Revisited — A Dual-Aspect Model. In Willis W., Faso D. (eds.). Contemporary Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives on Moral Development and Education. Cresskill, N.J: Hampton Press, 2008, pp. 185–220.
18. Mahmud S., Bretag T., Foltýnek T. Students’ Perceptions of Plagiarism Policy in Higher Education: a Com-parison of the United Kingdom, Czechia, Poland and Romania. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2018. Vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 271–289. doi:10.1007/s10805-018-9319-0
19. Medeiros K.E. et al. What is Working, What is Not, and What We Need to Know: a Meta-Analytic Review of Business Ethics Instruction. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2017. Vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 245–275. doi:10.1007/s10805-017-9281-2
20. Morris E.J. Academic integrity matters: five considerations for addressing contract cheating. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 2018. Vol. 14. doi:10.1007/s40979-018-0038-5
21. Mumford M.D. et al. Validation of Ethical Decision Making Measures: Evidence for a New Set of Measures. Ethics & Behavior, 2006. Vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 319–345. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb1604_4
22. Payan J., Reardon J., McCorkle D.E. The Effect of Culture on the Academic Honesty of Marketing and Business Students. Journal of Marketing Education, 2010. Vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 275–291. doi:10.1177/0273475310377781
23. Pell D.J., Amigud A. The Higher Education Dilemma: The Views of Faculty on Integrity, Organizational Culture, and Duty of Fidelity. Journal of Academic Ethics, 2023. Vol. 21, pp. 155–175. doi:10.1007/s10805-022-09445-5
24. Rest J.R., Narvaez D., Thoma S.J., Bebeau M.J. DIT2: Devising and testing a revised instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1999. Vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 644–659. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.644
25. Singh R., Ramdeo S. Contemporary Perspectives in Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. 254 p.
26. Steele L.M. et al. How Do We Know What Works? A Review and Critique of Current Practices in Ethics Training Evaluation. Accountability in Research, 2016. Vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 319–350. doi:10.1080/08989621.2016.1186547
27. Watts L.L. et al. Are Ethics Training Programs Improving? A Meta-Analytic Review of Past and Present Ethics Instruction in the Sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 2017. Vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 351–384. doi:10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025