scispace - formally typeset

Journal ArticleDOI

Academic dishonesty among Italian nursing students: A longitudinal study.

01 Mar 2017-Nurse Education Today (Churchill Livingstone)-Vol. 50, Iss: 1, pp 57-61

TL;DR: The results show that students get accustomed to taking academically deceitful actions and come to consider their behaviours acceptable and normal, thereby stabilizing them, which increases the probability of stabilizing subsequent deceitful behaviours.

AbstractConsidering the ethical issues related to nursing and that Ethics is an integral part of the nursing education in the degree course, one would suppose that academic dishonesty might be less frequent in nursing students than in students of other disciplines. However, several studies show that this trend of deceitful behaviour seems to be similar among the university nursing students and those of other disciplines. The aim of this study is to investigate the phenomenon of academic dishonesty in the classroom from a longitudinal perspective within a cohort of Italian nursing students. A non-experimental longitudinal design was used. All nursing students were recruited from the Nursing Science Bachelor Degree Program of a big Italian university in the centre of Italy and participants were part of an ongoing longitudinal research project which started in 2011 on nursing students' wellbeing. The results show that students get accustomed to taking academically deceitful actions. They come to consider their behaviours acceptable and normal, thereby stabilizing them, which increases the probability of stabilizing subsequent deceitful behaviours. The stability through time of academic cheating behaviours committed during higher education, within the study's timeframe, provides important perspectives into the establishment of rigorous standards of ethical and moral behaviours by the students.

Topics: Nurse education (67%), Academic dishonesty (58%), Higher education (51%)

Summary (1 min read)

STUDY

  • Procedure and participants Participants were part of an ongoing longitudinal research project startedin 2011 on nursing students' wellbeing.
  • Preliminary exploratory factor analyses supported the uni-dimensionality of the scale both at T1 and T2 and for both the version of the scale (cheating behaviours acted by the students and cheating behaviour acted by their colleagues).
  • Differences have been valued through a series of ANOVA levels of eachitem related to eachtime period, and the greatest differences effecthas been expressed through apartial index(TabachnickandFidell 2007).

RESULTS

  • The only significant difference for calculated probability where p <0.05isrelated to the self-reported behaviouritem of copying from the student’s own notes or bringing in illegitimate materials during the exams.
  • Suchbehaviour shows a significantincrease amongthe two time points, although the Cohen’sd associated with this difference suggests it is arather modest increase.
  • Relative to Time period 2 (T2), such differences would seem to weaken, and relative to the differences comparing the kind of behaviour, the results show that giving answers to a colleague during an examination(self_cheat_2) is more frequently committedby females;whereas, insisting teachers give higher evaluation scores (self_cheat_7) is more frequently committedby males.
  • This general tendency weakens inT2, whereperceptions of cheating behaviours associated with agebythe other_cheatgroup are weaker in both T1 and T2comparedwith the self-reported perceptions.

DISCUSSIONS

  • Honesty is considered a fundamental ethical value in all academic settings, and academic integrity has an undisputed importance in educational environments.
  • Therefore, the existenceof academic dishonesty must be established, first, to explorein context the state of academic integrity, and, second, to prevent the diffusion and stabilizationof unethicalbehaviours.
  • Considered as having the tendency to remain stable through time.
  • Some have not identified meaningful demographic differences in deceitful behaviours (Hilbert, 1988; McCabe, 2009; McCabe et al., 2001).
  • Student nurses become nurse professionals who are tied to the moral norms of the Deontological Code; patients must be able to trust in the assistance received, and that it must disburse ethical and moral integrity in every nursing activity (Kenny, 2007; Stonecypher&Willson, 2014; Nick & Llaguno,2015).

CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

  • According to Searle (2000)and Nick &Llaguno (2015), nursing is considered a profession that asks for a deeply ethical standard, and it is dependenton the moral integrity of the individualprofessional whose purpose is to furnish and guarantee professional nursing assistance tothe patient.
  • The profession must find an end tothe possible escalationof these behaviours.
  • For these reason, results of this study highlighted the importance of monitoring this phenomenon in the educational setting and examined the individual and the contextual factors that could influence the engagement in such kind of behaviour.
  • The dimensions that could predictacademic dishonesty need to be identify.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

1
ACADEMIC DISHONESTY AMONG ITALIAN NURSING STUDENTS: A LONGITUDINAL
STUDY
Published in Nurse Education Today
Please cite as: Macale, L., Ghezzi, V., Rocco, G., Fida, R., Vellone, E., & Alvaro, R., (2017).
Academic dishonesty among Italian nursing students: A longitudinal study. Nurse Education Today,
50, 57- 61. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2016.12.013
INTRODUCTION
The continued growth of academic dishonesty in nursing education worries educators and constitutes
an emergent problem in many countries (Arhin, 2009; ArhinandJones, 2009;Fontana, 2009; Chertok,
et al., 2014; Stonecypher&Willson, 2014; Nick & Llaguno,2015).Considering the ethical issues
related to nursing and that Ethics is an integral part of the nursing education in the degree course, one
would suppose that academic dishonesty might be less frequent in nursing students than in students
of other disciplines.(Arhin, 2009; Bailey, 2001; Fountana, 2009; Hart andMorgan, 2010; Hilbert,
1985; Hilbert, 1988; McCrink, 2008; Wilkinson, 2009; Klocko, 2014; Park, 2013). Indeed, McCrink
(2008)andKrueger (2014),has highlighted that nursing studentsmisbehaveboth in class and during
clinical training. The habit of copying text without correctly referencing the source, unsurprisingly
constituted the most common violation (35.2%). Although the percentage of dishonestyis lower
within the learning-by-doing cohort, the behaviours are of far greater concern. For example, studies
have revealed that of the9% of students who administered treatments in a clinical setting, almost 7%
of those students recorded reactions to treatments or medicines andneversubmitted them
forevaluation bya nurse or physician.(McCrink, 2008). Furthermore, 13% of clinicalstudents had
occasionally recorded vital signs that had never been taken, and 2% of the students recorded
medicines that were,in fact, not administered as prescribed. Finally, more than a third (35.3%) of the
students haddiscussed their behaviourin public with the patients or with other staff(McCabe, 2009;
McCrink, 2008).According to Nick &Llaguno (2015), as many as 80% of college students cheat.
Results of research attested for significant correlationsbetween cheating behaviours and demographic
characteristics (Langone, 2007; McCabe 2009; 2001; Sarlauskiene&Stabingis, 2014; Krueger, 2014).

2
These findings have also been studied subsequently as probable predictors to explain deceitful
academic behaviours, but the results obtained have often been incoherent (McCabe, 2001; Rennie
andRudland, 2003; Park, 2014).Bradshaw and Lowenstein (1999) suggested that "students thatused
to cheat, to lie, and to undertake other deceitful actions, will see [these behaviours as] normal and
they will transport such behaviours into other contexts, as for example to the patient's care" (p.
112).So it follows thatacademic dishonesty in nursing education should awaken interest and
apprehension, during the student’s clinical practicum and as a future professional because what is at
stake is thepatient’s safety (Nonis, 2001; Arhin, 2009; Fountain, 2009; Nick & Llaguno,2015).
The risk of expandingdishonestacademic behaviours intopost-degreeclinical practice is deeply
worrisome to educators (Woith et al, 2012; Nick& Llaguno,2015).Indeed,many studies show that
nursing students whohave cheated in class are highly likely to manipulate the clinical data in their
future positions,as compared with those who do notcheat (Gaberson, 1997; Harding et al., 2004;
Harper, 2006; Park, 2013; 2014).Other studies by Kenny (2007) Laduke (2013)and Krueger
(2014),have found a strong correlation betweencheatingand unethical professional behavior, in
particular a positive relationship was found between the frequency of cheating in classroom and
clinical settings. Insupport of this finding, according to some authors, the greatest predictor of
dishonesty in clinical settings consists of havingalready cheated during classroom exams(Park,
2014).
Academic honesty isa particularlyimportantcharacteristic inthose who arepreparing to become
professional healthcare providers, and it also assumes greatimportance for the educators whoare
responsible for preparing competent and honest professional nurses (Nick & Llaguno,2015).
In addition, there is a lack of standardization and shared definition of what is considered 'cheating',
which is interpreted differently by teachers and students by creating confusion regarding the
understanding of whatconstitutes various forms of cheating, probably for this reason, do not think

3
cheating is a serious transgression, students view their behavior acceptable and normal,thereby
stabilizing them in the time. (Smedley et al, 2015; Farnese, 2011; Nick &
Llaguno,2015).Bandura’sSocial Cognitive Theory (2002) SCT,was used as the theoretical
framework for this study. One of the fundamental principles of the SCT, provides for reciprocal
determinism into how people learn and behave, according to which people learn by observing the
environment around them and processing what they see into their own behavior and thoughts.
(Bandura, 1978).
Currently, to the best of our knowledge there are no studies investigating academic dishonesty
among the Italian nursing students from a longitudinal perspective.
METHODS
Aim
The aim of this study is to investigate the phenomenon of academic dishonesty in classroom from a
longitudinal perspective within a cohort of Italian nursing students, observe behavioral stability and
the possible changes, over two periods of time: from entry into the nursing degree programme
through the following year. These observations will also consider and note the differences between
types of dishonesty and age of participant.
Design
A non-experimental longitudinal design was used. All nursing students were recruited from the
Nursing Science Degree Program of a big Italian University of the centre of Italy.
Procedure and participants
Participants were part of an ongoing longitudinal research project startedin 2011 on nursing students'
wellbeing.Students involved in the research filledin a self-report paper and pencil questionnaire
measuring different constructs. In the first year, Time 1 (T1), of this study, 503 students were
involved, with T1 = 71.3% females;medianage, 22.6 years; SD = 4.5.The second year, Time 2 (T2),

4
there were 354 students involved, with T2 = 73.8% females;medianage, 23.1 years; SD = 4. These
students also participated in the follow-upphase of the research project.
Tools
A reduced-version scale ofacademic cheatingbehaviours (Farnese et al., 2011)has been administered
both at T1 and T2. The scales comprised sevenitems measured on a 5-pointfrequency scale (from1 =
never or almost neverto 5 = always or almost always). The scale has been administered in two
different forms: misbehaviour acted by the student itself; and the perception of misbehavior acted by
their colleagues. Preliminary exploratory factor analyses supported the uni-dimensionality of the
scale both at T1 and T2 and for both the version of the scale (cheating behaviours acted by the
students and cheating behaviour acted by their colleagues).The scale reached a good reliability with
Cronbach’s alpha (α) of0.81 forboth T1 and T2 for the selfreport version, and of0.84 (T1) and0.85
(T2) for the perception others' misbehaviour version of the scale. Moreover, the item-total
correlations in both cases and in both time periods were always higher than 0.40.
Analytical strategies
The stability of the cheating behaviours among the two considered timepoints has been
evaluatedwith a series of t-tests for repeated measures related to every item, and differences have
been expressed through “d” (Cohen, 1988). Small differences are expressed as d = |0.2|;medium, d =
|0.5|; and large, d = |0.8|.Differences have been valued through a series of ANOVA levels of
eachitem related to eachtime period, and the greatest differences effecthas been expressed through
apartial index(TabachnickandFidell 2007). Inclusive values betweenzeroand0.3 indicate low
differences;between0.3 and0.5 moderate differences; and over0.5 indicates strong
differences.Finally, correlations between cheating behavioursand age have been also examined.
Ethical considerations
Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review of University prior to conducting this
study. All of the participants were informed of the study’s purpose and procedure. They were also

5
informed that their participation was voluntary, and they could refuse to participate or withdraw from
the study. The students were also informed that their participation would not affect their course
grades. All information gathered was treated confidentially and anonymously. Written, informed
consent was obtained prior to beginning the research.
RESULTS
Table 1 shows the stabilityamong time. The only significant difference for calculated probability (p-
value) where p <0.05isrelated to the self-reported behaviouritem of copying from the student’s own
notes or bringing in illegitimate materials during the exams. In this regard, suchbehaviour shows a
significantincrease amongthe two time points, although the Cohen’sd associated with this difference
suggests it is arather modest increase.
INSERT HERE TABLE 1
____________________________________________
Table 2 presents analyses related to differences in kindsof cheating behaviourspresented during both
time periods. In Time period 1 (T1), some behaviours are perpetratedmore frequentlybythe males
(for example, theitemself_cheat_5, “falsifying certificates of presence”); while others are
perpetratedmore frequentlybythe females (for example, the item self_cheat_2, giving answersto a
colleague inan exam). With regards to others’ perceptions of frequency, thedeceitful behaviours
more often committed by females include other_cheat_2 (giving answers) and
other_cheat_6(copying answers from notes).Relative to Time period 2 (T2), such differences would
seem to weaken, and relative to the differences comparing the kind of behaviour, the results show
that giving answers to a colleague during an examination(self_cheat_2) is more frequently
committedby females;whereas, insisting teachers give higher evaluation scores (self_cheat_7) is
more frequently committedby males.Furthermore, giving answers to a colleague during an
examination (other_cheat_2) is perceived as more frequently done by females.
INSERT HERE TABLE 2

Citations
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The findings of this study support existing literature that refutes the assumption that the nobility of these disciplines would result in a lower incidence of cheating behaviours and found troubling rates of academic and professional misconduct among the surveyed population.
Abstract: Background Universities' responsibility to ensure academic integrity is frustrated by software and communication tools that facilitate content reuse coupled with a growing international essay writing economy. A wide range of behaviours constitute academic dishonesty and while a complex phenomenon to examine, existing evidence suggests that there is sufficient proliferation (both in volume and variety) of these behaviours among Australian university students to warrant concern. This proliferation presents faculty and staff with new challenges in ensuring academic integrity. Objectives This paper reports findings of a nationwide cross-sectional survey of 361 students enrolled in an Australian nursing degree program and describes the extent of academic dishonesty among those surveyed. Design An online survey adapted from previous work was used to collect data on academic dishonesty, professional dishonesty and social desirability bias. Analysis of this data enabled identification of the prevalence of dishonesty, relationships between individual characteristics and dishonest behaviours, associations between academic and professional dishonesty, and the impact of deterrents to such behaviour. Results Plagiarism was the most frequently reported form of academic misconduct. Most participants indicated that threat of severe punishment and signing of verification statements would deter undesirable academic behaviour. Despite this, a relatively high proportion of students reported engaging in at least one form of academic misconduct, the likelihood of which was higher among younger age groups. Of concern was that a correlation was found between academic and professional misconduct, the most common being the recording of inaccurate or fabricated vital signs and breaching client privacy. Conclusion In health professional education, there is a tendency to assume that the nobility of these disciplines would result in a lower incidence of cheating behaviours. The findings of this study support existing literature that refutes this assumption. This study found troubling rates of academic and professional misconduct among the surveyed population.

21 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There was a lack of understanding of plagiarism and its legal ramifications among undergraduate medical and nursing students in Erbil, Iraq, and the findings indicate that there is an urgent need to increase students' understanding and its consequences so as to reduce the incidence of this type of academic misconduct.
Abstract: Objectives: The rapidly rising incidence of plagiarism among students at universities throughout the world requires attention. This study aimed to determine the extent to which medical and nursing students in Erbil, Iraq, plagiarise, their knowledge, understanding and perceptions of plagiarism and the underlying factors that may lead them to plagiarise. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out between January and June 2017 among a sample of 400 undergraduate medical and nursing students at Hawler Medical University in Erbil. Plagiarism-related data were collected through a specially designed self-administered questionnaire. Results: In total, 280 (70%) medical students and 120 (30%) nursing students were included in the study. The reported prevalence of plagiarism was 54.3%, with a slightly higher prevalence among male students compared to female students (54.9% versus 53.8%; P = 0.820) and medical students compared to nursing students (58.9% versus 43.3%; ( P = 0.004). Alarmingly, 34.8% of the students did not know what plagiarism was, and only 28% were aware of the legal consequences of plagiarism. Reported reasons for plagiarising included laziness and the ease with which others’ work could be plagiarised, confusion, cultural reasons and pressure to meet deadlines. Conclusion: There was a lack of understanding of plagiarism and its legal ramifications among undergraduate medical and nursing students in Erbil. The findings of this study indicate that there is an urgent need to increase students’ understanding of plagiarism and its consequences so as to reduce the incidence of this type of academic misconduct. Keywords: Undergraduate Medical Education; Plagiarism; Medical Students; Nursing Students; Perceptions; Iraq.

11 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A questionnaire to develop and validate a questionnaire for investigating nursing students' perceptions about the reasons for academic dishonesty during examinations, whose identification can guide preventive strategies.
Abstract: Background Understanding why nursing students engage in academic dishonesty is crucial, since cheating is becoming more common and can be followed by unethical professional practice. Objectives To develop and validate a questionnaire for investigating nursing students' perceptions about the reasons for academic dishonesty during examinations, along with identifying the most important of these reasons. Design Cross-sectional survey with the use of a convenience sample. Participants and setting. 660 undergraduate students of a nursing department in Greece. Methods Questionnaire items were developed based on literature review and student interviews, evaluation of their content validity and intra-rater reliability. The participants completed the questionnaire electronically, which included items referring to behaviors of and reasons for academic dishonesty during examinations. Based on their responses, factor analysis was used to determine structural validity of the items that referred to the reasons for academic dishonesty. Results High prevalence of academic dishonesty behaviors during examinations was confirmed. Reasons for academic dishonesty were grouped into three factors, which included 17 items in total. Highly-rated items mainly referred to non-realistic demands of and unfair student treatment by academic personnel, absence of severe consequences for cheating, the way examinations are performed, and the importance of achieving high grades. Female, junior and high degree grade students had significantly higher percentages of highly-rated responses in some items. Conclusions These findings offered knowledge about the reasons that students perceive to mostly favor cheating, whose identification can guide preventive strategies.

11 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate academic dishonesty among nursing students at a public university in Malaysia. Methods This study utilized a descriptive and cross-sectional design to evaluate academic dishonesty among nursing students using a purposive sampling method. The participants of this study consisted of 201 students from diploma (Year 2 and 3) and degree (Year 2 to Year 4) nursing programmes. A self-administered, validated questionnaire was used for data collection. Institutional ethics committee clearance was obtained prior to commencement of the study. Results The results of this study showed that 82.1% and 74.6% of nursing students had engaged at least once in an act of academic dishonesty in an academic or clinical setting, respectively. The most frequent form of academic dishonesty in an academic setting was plagiarism (77.1%). There was a significant association between gender and academic dishonesty in a clinical setting (p Conclusion Academic dishonesty in both academic and clinical settings is a common problem among nursing students in Malaysia. Training on academic ethics is required in nursing curricula to improve the quality of education among nursing colleges and reduce the prevalence of unethical behaviours among students.

7 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Nursing Student Perceptions of Dishonesty Scale (NSPDS) can help researchers and educators understand more clearly nursing students' perceptions of dishonesty and allow for the creation of individualized, and therefore more effective, interventions to reduce dishonest behaviors of nursing students.
Abstract: Background Dishonesty in the classroom suggests dishonesty in practice. There is need to better understand nursing students' perceptions of dishonest behaviors in the classroom and clinical setting. There is currently no instrument to assess perceptions in the classroom and clinical setting. Objective The purpose of this study was to develop an instrument to assess nursing students' perceptions of academically dishonest behaviors in the classroom and clinical setting. Design Mixed Methods Instrument Development Study. Participants 971 BSN students. Method Using the results from a content synthesis of the literature and a small qualitative study, we created the Nursing Student Perceptions of Dishonesty Scale (NSPDS) and examined its psychometric properties. Results Factor analysis suggests strong loading of subscales in both settings with two comparable categories allow for correlation of perceptions in the classroom and clinical settings. Cronbach's alpha values begin to establish reliability and PAF with Promax rotation and correlational analysis begin to establish validity. Conclusion This NSPDS can help researchers and educators understand more clearly nursing students' perceptions of dishonesty. This will allow for the creation of individualized, and therefore more effective, interventions to reduce dishonest behaviors of nursing students. Further work is needed to strengthen reliability and validity.

5 citations


References
More filters

Book
01 Jan 1983
TL;DR: In this Section: 1. Multivariate Statistics: Why? and 2. A Guide to Statistical Techniques: Using the Book Research Questions and Associated Techniques.
Abstract: In this Section: 1. Brief Table of Contents 2. Full Table of Contents 1. BRIEF TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 A Guide to Statistical Techniques: Using the Book Chapter 3 Review of Univariate and Bivariate Statistics Chapter 4 Cleaning Up Your Act: Screening Data Prior to Analysis Chapter 5 Multiple Regression Chapter 6 Analysis of Covariance Chapter 7 Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance Chapter 8 Profile Analysis: The Multivariate Approach to Repeated Measures Chapter 9 Discriminant Analysis Chapter 10 Logistic Regression Chapter 11 Survival/Failure Analysis Chapter 12 Canonical Correlation Chapter 13 Principal Components and Factor Analysis Chapter 14 Structural Equation Modeling Chapter 15 Multilevel Linear Modeling Chapter 16 Multiway Frequency Analysis 2. FULL TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction Multivariate Statistics: Why? Some Useful Definitions Linear Combinations of Variables Number and Nature of Variables to Include Statistical Power Data Appropriate for Multivariate Statistics Organization of the Book Chapter 2: A Guide to Statistical Techniques: Using the Book Research Questions and Associated Techniques Some Further Comparisons A Decision Tree Technique Chapters Preliminary Check of the Data Chapter 3: Review of Univariate and Bivariate Statistics Hypothesis Testing Analysis of Variance Parameter Estimation Effect Size Bivariate Statistics: Correlation and Regression. Chi-Square Analysis Chapter 4: Cleaning Up Your Act: Screening Data Prior to Analysis Important Issues in Data Screening Complete Examples of Data Screening Chapter 5: Multiple Regression General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Regression Analyses Fundamental Equations for Multiple Regression Major Types of Multiple Regression Some Important Issues. Complete Examples of Regression Analysis Comparison of Programs Chapter 6: Analysis of Covariance General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Analysis of Covariance Fundamental Equations for Analysis of Covariance Some Important Issues Complete Example of Analysis of Covariance Comparison of Programs Chapter 7: Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance Fundamental Equations for Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance Some Important Issues Complete Examples of Multivariate Analysis of Variance and Covariance Comparison of Programs Chapter 8: Profile Analysis: The Multivariate Approach to Repeated Measures General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Profile Analysis Fundamental Equations for Profile Analysis Some Important Issues Complete Examples of Profile Analysis Comparison of Programs Chapter 9: Discriminant Analysis General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Discriminant Analysis Fundamental Equations for Discriminant Analysis Types of Discriminant Analysis Some Important Issues Comparison of Programs Chapter 10: Logistic Regression General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Logistic Regression Analysis Fundamental Equations for Logistic Regression Types of Logistic Regression Some Important Issues Complete Examples of Logistic Regression Comparison of Programs Chapter 11: Survival/Failure Analysis General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Survival Analysis Fundamental Equations for Survival Analysis Types of Survival Analysis Some Important Issues Complete Example of Survival Analysis Comparison of Programs Chapter 12: Canonical Correlation General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations Fundamental Equations for Canonical Correlation Some Important Issues Complete Example of Canonical Correlation Comparison of Programs Chapter 13: Principal Components and Factor Analysis General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations Fundamental Equations for Factor Analysis Major Types of Factor Analysis Some Important Issues Complete Example of FA Comparison of Programs Chapter 14: Structural Equation Modeling General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Structural Equation Modeling Fundamental Equations for Structural Equations Modeling Some Important Issues Complete Examples of Structural Equation Modeling Analysis. Comparison of Programs Chapter 15: Multilevel Linear Modeling General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Multilevel Linear Modeling Fundamental Equations Types of MLM Some Important Issues Complete Example of MLM Comparison of Programs Chapter 16: Multiway Frequency Analysis General Purpose and Description Kinds of Research Questions Limitations to Multiway Frequency Analysis Fundamental Equations for Multiway Frequency Analysis Some Important Issues Complete Example of Multiway Frequency Analysis Comparison of Programs

53,012 citations


Journal ArticleDOI

45,865 citations


"Academic dishonesty among Italian n..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...Analytical strategies The stability of the cheating behaviours among the two considered time points has been evaluated with a series of t-tests for repeated measures related to every item, and differences have been expressed through ―d‖ (Cohen, 1988)....

    [...]


01 Jan 2002
Abstract: Social cognitive theory provides an agentic conceptual framework within which to analyze the determinants and psychosocial mechanisms through which symbolic communication influences human thought, affect and action. Communications systems operate through two pathways. In the direct pathway, they promote changes by informing, enabling, motivating, and guiding participants. In the socially mediated pathway, media influences link participants to social networks and community settings that provide natural incentives and continued personalized guidance, for desired change. Social cognitive theory analyzes social diffusion of new styles of behavior in terms of the psychosocial factors governing their acquisition and adoption and the social networks through which they spread and are supported. Structural interconnectedness provides potential diffusion paths; sociocognitive factors largely determine what diffuses through those paths.

2,894 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
Abstract: Explanations of human behavior have generally favored unidirectional causal models emphasizing either environmental or internal determinants of behavior. In social learning theory, causal processes are conceptualized in terms of reciprocal determinism. Viewed from this perspective, psychological functioning involves a continuous reciprocal interaction between behavioral, cognitive, and environmental influences. The major controversies between unidirectional and reciprocal models of human behavior center on the issue of self influences. A self system within the framework of social learning theory comprises cognitive structures and subjunctions for perceiving, evaluating, and regulating behavior, not a psychic agent that controls action. The influential role of the self system in reciprocal determinism is documented through a reciprocal analysis of self-regulatory processes. Reciprocal determinism is proposed as a basic analytic principle for analyzing psychosocial phenomena at the level of intrapersonal development, interpersonal transactions, and interactive functioning of organizational and social systems. Recent years have witnessed a heightened interest in the basic conceptions of human nature underlying different psychological theories. This interest stems in part from growing recognition of how such conceptions delimit research to selected processes and are in turn shaped by findings of paradigms embodying the particular view. As psychological knowledge is converted to behavioral technologies, the models of human behavior on which research is premised have important social as well as theoretical implications (Bandura, 1974). Explanations of human behavior have generally been couched in terms of a limited set of determinants, usually portrayed as operating in a unidirectional manner. Exponents of environmental determinism study and theorize about how behavior is controlled by situational influences. Those favoring personal determinism seek the causes of human behavior in dispositional sources in the form of instincts, drives, traits, and other motivational forces within the individual. Interactionists attempt to accommodate both situational 344 • APRIL 1978 • AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST Copyright 1978 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0003-066X/78/3304-0344$00.7S and dispositional factors, but within an essentially unidirectional view of behavioral processes. The present article analyzes the various causal models and the role of self influences in behavior from the perspective of reciprocal determinism. Unidirectional environmental determinism is carried to its extreme in the more radical forms of behaviorism. It is not that the interdependence of personal and environmental influences is never acknowledged by advocates of this point of view. Indeed, Skinner (1971) has often commented on the capacity for countercontrol. However, the notion of countercontrol portrays the environment as the instigating force to which individuals can counteract. As will be shown later, people create and activate environments as well as rebut them. A further conceptual problem is that having been acknowledged, the reality of reciprocal interdependence is negated and the preeminent control of behavior by the environment is repeatedly reasserted (e.g., \"A person does not act upon the world, the world acts upon him,\" Skinner, 1971, p. 211). The environment thus becomes an autonomous force that automatically shapes, orchestrates, and controls behavior. Whatever allusions are made to two-way processes, environmental rule clearly emerges as the reigning metaphor in the operant view of reality. There exists no shortage of advocates of alternative theories emphasizing the personal determination of environments. Humanists and existentialists, who stress the human capacity for conscious judgment and intentional action, contend that individuals determine what they become by their own free choices. Most psychologists find conceptions of human behavior in terms of unidirectional personal determinism as unsatisfying as those espousing unidirectional environmental determinism. Preparation of this article was facilitated by Public Health Research Grant M-S162 from the National Institute of Mental Health and by the James McKeen Cattell Award. Requests for reprints should be sent to Albert Bandura, Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 9430S. To contend that mind creates reality fails to acknowledge that environmental influences partly determine what people attend to, perceive, and think. To contend further that the methods of natural science are incapable of dealing with personal determinants of behavior does not enlist many supporters from the ranks of those who are moved more by empirical evidence than by philosophic discourse. Social learning theory (Bandura, 1974, 1977b) analyzes behavior in terms of reciprocal determinism. The term determinism is used here to signify the production of effects by events, rather than in the doctrinal sense that actions are completely determined by a prior sequence of causes independent of the individual. Because of the complexity of interacting factors, events produce effects probabilistically rather than inevitably. In their transactions with the environment, people are not simply reactors to external stimulation. Most external influences affect behavior through intermediary cognitive processes. Cognitive factors partly determine which external events will be observed, how they will be perceived, whether they have any lasting effects, what valence and efficacy they have, and how the information they convey will be organized for future use. The extraordinary capacity of humans to use symbols enables them to engage in reflective thought, to create, and to plan foresightful courses of action in thought rather than having to perform possible options and suffer the consequences of thoughtless action. By altering their immediate environment, by creating cognitive self-inducements, and by arranging conditional incentives for themselves, people can exercise some influence over their own behavior. An act therefore includes among its determinants self-produced influences. It is true that behavior is influenced by the environment, but the environment is partly of a person's own making. By their actions, people play a role in creating the social milieu and other circumstances that arise in their daily transactions. Thus, from the social learning perspective, psychological functioning involves a continuous reciprocal interaction between behavioral, cognitive, and environmental influences. Reciprocal Determinism and Interactionism Over the years the locus of the causes of behavior has been debated in personality and social psychology in terms of dispositional and situational UNIDIRECTIONAL

1,842 citations


Additional excerpts

  • ...(Bandura, 1978)....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
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.

980 citations


"Academic dishonesty among Italian n..." refers background or result in this paper

  • ...In fact, some studies have not found any relationship between gender and deceitful behaviours (Hilbert, 1988; McCabe, 2009; McCabe et al., 2001) and others (Aiken 1991) that male students cheat more than female students (Stonecypher & Willson, 2014)....

    [...]

  • ...With regards to age results of the present study are in line with McCabe et al. (2001), that younger students committed deceitful behaviours more than the senior students....

    [...]