scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Donald L. McCabe

Bio: Donald L. McCabe is an academic researcher from Rutgers University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cheating & Academic integrity. The author has an hindex of 37, co-authored 48 publications receiving 9201 citations. Previous affiliations of Donald L. McCabe include Saint Petersburg State University & Indiana State University.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors reviewed 1 decade of research on cheating in academic institutions and found that cheating is prevalent and that some forms of cheating have increased dramatically in the last 30 years.
Abstract: This article reviews 1 decade of research on cheating in academic institutions. This research demonstrates that cheating is prevalent and that some forms of cheating have increased dramatically in the last 30 years. This research also suggests that although both individual and contextual factors influence cheating, contextual factors, such as students' perceptions of peers' behavior, are the most powerful influence. In addition, an institution's academic integrity programs and policies, such as honor codes, can have a significant influence on students' behavior. Finally, we offer suggestions for managing cheating from students' and faculty members' perspectives.

1,079 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a field survey focused on two constructs that have been developed to represent the ethical context in organizations: ethical climate and ethical culture, and investigated the relationships between the emergent ethical context factors and an ethics-related attitude (organizational commitment) and behavior (observed unethical conduct) for respondents who work in organizations with and without ethics codes.
Abstract: This field survey focused on two constructs that have been developed to represent the ethical context in organizations: ethical climate and ethical culture. We first examined issues of convergence and divergence between these constructs through factor analysis and correlational analysis. Results suggested that the two constructs are measuring somewhat different, but strongly related dimensions of the ethical context. We then investigated the relationships between the emergent ethical context factors and an ethics-related attitude (organizational commitment) and behavior (observed unethical conduct) for respondents who work in organizations with and without ethics codes. Regression results indicated that an ethical culture-based dimension was more strongly associated with observed unethical conduct in code organizations while climate-based dimensions were more strongly associated with observed unethical conduct in non-code organizations. Ethical culture and ethical climate-based factors influenced organizational commitment similarly in both types of organizations. Normative implications of the study are discussed, as are implications for future theorizing, research and management practice.

1,034 citations

Book ChapterDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors study the effectiveness of honor codes in a more complex social context and compare academic dishonesty in colleges that have honor codes and those that do not, and find that the existence of an honor code may not be the only predictor of cheating behavior.
Abstract: Research and media reports have established the continued pervasiveness of academic dishonesty among students on America's college campuses [12, 13, 22, 25, 26, 33, 46]. While some colleges have responded with academic integrity classes and increased efforts to convince reluctant faculty members to report student cheaters [13], there is a renewed interest in the concept of "community" as an effective foundation for campus governance. For example, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching's special report, Campus Life: In Search of Community, concludes, "What is needed, we believe, is a larger, more integrative vision of community in higher education. . . . a place where individuals accept their obligations to the group and where well-defined governance procedures guide behavior for the common good" [10, p. 7]. Derek Bok, in Universities and the Future of American, echoes this theme: [U]niversities need to consider the larger campus environment beyond the classroom. An obvious step in this direction is to have rules tha t prohibit lying, cheating, stealing, violent behavior, interference with free expression, or other acts that break fundamental norms. Such rules not only protect the rights of everyone in the community; they also signal the importance of basic moral obligations and strengthen habits of ethical behavior [5, pp. 84-85]. Bok offers the honor code as perhaps the most effective approach in matters of academic integrity, but acknowledges that, "the pervasive competition for grades; the size, diversity, and impersonal nature of many large universities; their lack of any honor code traditon; and the wide-spread distaste for accusing one's classmates" combine to work against such an approach [5, p. 87]. Although the honor code traditon dates back over a century, the viability of such codes on today's campuses is open to some question [12]. Small, relatively homogeneous campuses have generally given way to large, culturally diverse institutions which lack any apparent sense of community or common purpose among students other than getting a credential and a job. Despite the fundamental nature of this question, there is a surprising paucity of empirical research which addresses the effectiveness of honor codes. the study discussed here attempts to help fill this gap by comparing academic dishonesty in colleges that have honor codes and those that do not. The few studies that have addressed the effectiveness of honor codes [7, 9] have generally considered code effectiveness independent of context. We believe that it is important to acknowledge and understand the complexity of the social systems within which honor codes are embedded and the fact that other contextual factors may be as important or more important than the existence of an honor code by itself. Thus this study extends beyond previous work by studying the effectiveness of honor codes within a more complex social context. Honor Codes in Context Academic Dishonesty Depending on one's definition of academic dishonesty, the data collection methods employed, and other variables, prior studies report that anywhere from 13 to 95 percent of college students engage in some form of academic dishonesty [12, 17, 20, 21, 26, 30, 31, 42]. A major dichotomy that separates these prior studies is the level of analysis. One stream of research has focused on individual differences though to be predictive of cheating behavior, such as gender [45], grade point average [1, 22,], work ethic [15], Type A behavior, competitive achievement-striving [35], and self-esteem [44]. In contrast, other studies have concentrated on the institutional level of analysis and examined such contextual factors as honor codes [7, 8, 9], faculty responses to cheating [26], sanction threats [33, 42], and social learning [33]. Although the "individual differences" approach helps to understand individuals' predispositions to cheat, the findings are not particularly useful to the university administrator searching for effective institutional responses to issues of academic dishonesty. …

946 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that cheating was influenced by a number of characteristics of individuals including age, gender, and grade point average, as well as contextual factors including the level of cheating among peers, peer disapproval of cheating, fraternity/sorority membership, and the perceived severity of penalties for cheating.
Abstract: Students at nine medium to large state universities were surveyed in this comprehensive investigation of the influences of individual and contextual factors on self-reported academic dishonesty. Results suggested that cheating was influenced by a number of characteristics of individuals including age, gender, and grade-point average, as well as a number of contextual factors including the level of cheating among peers, peer disapproval of cheating, fraternity/sorority membership, and the perceived severity of penalties for cheating. Peer disapproval was the strongest influential factor.

800 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article found that graduate business students cheat more than their non-business-student peers and that cheating is associated with perceived peer behavior, as well as the perceived certainty of being reported by a peer, and the understanding and acceptance of academic integrity policies by students.
Abstract: Little is currently known about cheating among graduate business students. We collected data from more than 5,000 business (mostly MBA) and nonbusiness graduate students at 32 colleges and universities in the United States and Canada during the 2002–2003 and 2003–2004 academic years to test a series of hypotheses regarding the prevalence of graduate business student cheating and reasons why these students cheat. We found that graduate business students cheat more than their nonbusiness-student peers. Correlation results found cheating to be associated with perceived peer behavior, as well as the perceived certainty of being reported by a peer, and the understanding and acceptance of academic integrity policies by students and faculty. But, regression analysis results suggest that perceived peer behavior has the largest effect. Drawing from these findings and past research on undergraduate students, we propose strategies that business schools and faculty can use to promote academic integrity in graduate business programs.

608 citations


Cited by
More filters
Book
01 Jun 1976

2,728 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a literature review focuses on the emerging construct of ethical leadership and compares this construct with related concepts that share a common concern for a moral dimension of leadership (e.g., spiritual, authentic, and transformational leadership).
Abstract: Our literature review focuses on the emerging construct of ethical leadership and compares this construct with related concepts that share a common concern for a moral dimension of leadership (e.g., spiritual, authentic, and transformational leadership). Drawing broadly from the intersection of the ethics and leadership literatures, we offer propositions about the antecedents and outcomes of ethical leadership. We also identify issues and questions to be addressed in the future and discuss their implications for research and practice. Our review indicates that ethical leadership remains largely unexplored, offering researchers opportunities for new discoveries and leaders opportunities to improve their effectiveness.

2,542 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The authors investigate how external and internal rewards work in concert to produce (dis)honesty and suggest that dishonesty governed by self-concept maintenance is likely to be prevalent in the economy, and understand it has important implications for designing effective methods to curb dishonesty.
Abstract: Dishonesty plays a large role in the economy. Causes for (dis)honest behavior seem to be based partially on external rewards, and partially on internal rewards. Here, we investigate how such external and internal rewards work in concert to produce (dis)honesty. We propose and test a theory of self-concept maintenance that allows people to engage to some level in dishonest behavior, thereby benefiting from external benefits of dishonesty, while maintaining their positive view about themselves in terms of being honest individuals. The results show that (1) given the opportunity to engage in beneficial dishonesty, people will engage in such behaviors; (2) the amount of dishonesty is largely insensitive to either the expected external benefits or the costs associated with the deceptive acts; (3) people know about their actions but do not update their self-concepts; (4) causing people to become more aware of their internal standards for honesty decreases their tendency for deception; and (5) increasing the "degrees of freedom" that people have to interpret their actions increases their tendency for deception. We suggest that dishonesty governed by self-concept maintenance is likely to be prevalent in the economy, and understanding it has important implications for designing effective methods to curb dishonesty.Former working paper titles:“(Dis)Honesty: A Combination of Internal and External Rewards” and "Almost Honest: Internal and External Motives for Honesty")

2,056 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors show that people behave dishonestly enough to profit but honestly enough to delude themselves of their own integrity, and that a little bit of dishonesty gives a taste of profit without spoiling a positive self-view.
Abstract: People like to think of themselves as honest. However, dishonesty pays—and it often pays well. How do people resolve this tension? This research shows that people behave dishonestly enough to profit but honestly enough to delude themselves of their own integrity. A little bit of dishonesty gives a taste of profit without spoiling a positive self-view. Two mechanisms allow for such self-concept maintenance: inattention to moral standards and categorization malleability. Six experiments support the authors' theory of self-concept maintenance and offer practical applications for curbing dishonesty in everyday life.

1,756 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, Alice asked the Cheshire Cat to tell her which way she ought to go from here, and the Cat said that depends a good deal on where you want to get to, and then it doesn't matter which way you go.
Abstract: “Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?” Alice asked the Cheshire Cat. “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat. “I don't much care where...” said Alice. “Then it doesn't matter which way you go,” said the Cat. (Carroll, 1983: 72)

1,476 citations