Perceptions of and attitudes toward the issue of ethical behavior in academic work in higher education and factors contributing to it: A review of studies

Issue 55, 2024

Lin Chen, Norzihani Saharuddin, Mohd Mokhtar Muhamad

Received 28.11.2023, Revised 05.02.2024, Accepted 09.03.2024

https://doi.org/10.54919/physics/55.2024.156of0

Abstract

Relevance. Today, the topic of academic integrity is quite relevant among the scientific and educational communities, and it is based on the fact that ethical behavior in academic work in higher educational institutions is an effective tool that ensures the quality of higher education from the point of view of international standards. The issue of academic cheating in higher education institutions has become globalized, which has forced researchers to focus on the study of academic ethics from different perspectives.

Purpose. The main purpose of this study is to investigate the perception and attitude of teachers and students toward the issue of ethical behavior in academic work, as well as factors that contribute to solving the problem of plagiarism.

Methodology. The following scientific methods were used during the research: structural-functional method, method of synthesis, logical and comparative analysis, and method of generalization.

Results. The study showed that students' attitudes toward the issue of ethical behavior in academic work are similar due to various institutional, socio-cultural, and personal factors, as well as the fact that some individuals have no idea about plagiarism. It has been shown that a number of factors can lead to a problem of ethical behavior in academic work, and no taxonomy can explain either all these factors, how they affect the problem, or how it manifests itself. The study shows that students do not feel guilty for missing classes and using other people's work on their own. Most people demand a tolerant attitude towards plagiarism and accept the practice of passing off other people's tasks and Internet sources as their own.

Conclusions. The practical significance of the work is that all theoretical provisions, conclusions, and recommendations can be used in educational institutions by teachers and students to increase their level of knowledge about ethical behavior in academic work.

Keywords: plagiarism; fraud; dishonesty; misconduct; higher education; issues of perception and attitude; academic integrity

Suggested citation

Chen L, Saharuddin N, Muhamad M. Perceptions of and attitudes toward the issue of ethical behavior in academic work in higher education and factors contributing to it: A review of studies. Sci Herald Uzhhorod Univ Ser Phys. 2024;(55):1560-1568. DOI: 10.54919/physics/55.2024.156of0

Download article

References

  1. Alajami A. Promoting ethical behavior and how junior investigators perceive academic integrity: Critical approach. Curr Res Behav Sci. 2021;2:100027.
  2. Zachek A. The history, evolution, and trends of academic dishonesty: A literature review. Nebraska Educ. 2020;5:105-120.
  3. Baran L, Jonason PK. Academic dishonesty among university students: The roles of the psychopathy, motivation, and self-efficacy. PLoS ONE. 2020;15(8):e0238141.
  4. Nabee SG, Mageto J, Pisa N. Investigating predictors of academic plagiarism among university students. Int J Learn, Teach Educ Res. 2020;19(12):264-280.
  5. De Lima JÁ, Sousa Á, Medeiros A, Misturada B, Novo C. Understanding undergraduate plagiarism in the context of students' academic experience. J Academ Ethic. 2021;20:147-168.
  6. Stoesz BM, Eaton SE. Academic integrity policies of publicly funded universities in western Canada. Educ Polic. 2022;36(6):1529-1548.
  7. Eaton SE, Pethrick H, Turner KL. Academic integrity and student mental well-being: A rapid review. Сanad Perspect Academ Integrit. 2023;5(2):34-58.
  8. Jena ZA. The cognitive conditions associated with academic dishonesty in university students and its effect on society. UC Merced Undergraduate Research Journal; 2020. https://doi.org/10.5070/M4121047260
  9. Nyamasvisva ET, Arabi AAM, Buhari A, Hasan FA, Ramasamy J. Prevalence of premeditated academic dishonesty at university level. A case study. J Crit Rev. 2020;7(15):4494-4501.
  10. Pecorari D, Sutherland‑Smith W. Perspectives on positive academic ethics: An introduction. J Academ Ethic. 2021;19:305-308.
  11. Bashir H, Singh K. The investigation of the relationship between anomie and academic dishonesty of college students. Int J Social Sci Rev. 2018;6(1):5-8.
  12. Mahmud S, Bretag T, Foltýnek T. Students' perceptions of plagiarism policy in higher education: a comparison of the United Kingdom, Czechia, Poland and Romania. J Academ Ethic. 2018;17(3):271-289.
  13. Ghiațău RM. Fighting academic dishonesty in romanian universities: lessons from international research. In: International Perspectives on Education and Society, Vol. 40 (pp. 329-343). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited; 2021.
  14. Cheng YC, Hung FC, Hsu HM. The relationship between academic dishonesty, ethical attitude and ethical climate: The evidence from Taiwan. Sustain. 2021;13(21):11615.
  15. Javaeed A, Khan AS, Khan ShH, Ghauri SKh. Perceptions of plagiarism among undergraduate medical students in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. Pakistan J Med Sci. 2019;35(2):532-536.
  16. Hu G, Lei J. Investigating Chinese university students' knowledge of and attitudes toward plagiarism from an integrated perspective. Lang Learn. 2012;62(3):813-850.
  17. Ludlum M, Hongell L, Tigerstedt Ch, Teeman J. Academic ethics: a pilot study on the attitudes of Finnish students. J Academ Ethic. 2017;15(4):307-320.
  18. MacLeod PD, Eaton SE. The paradox of faculty attitudes toward student violations of academic integrity. J Academ Ethic. 2020;18:347-362.
  19. Kasler J, Hen M, Sharabi-Nov A. Academic integrity in higher education: The case of a medium-size college in the Galilee, Israel. J Academ Ethic. 2019;17(2):151-167.
  20. Shang HF. An investigation of plagiarism software use and awareness training on English as a foreign language (EFL) students. J Comp High Educ. 2019;31:105-120.
  21. Sun X, Hu G. What do academics know and do about plagiarism? An interview study with Chinese university teachers of English. Ethic Behav. 2020;30(6):459-479.
  22. Hu G, Lei J. Chinese university students'' perceptions of plagiarism. Ethic Behav. 2015;25(3):233-255.
  23. Javaid ST, Sultan S, Ehrich JF. Contrasting first and final year undergraduate students' plagiarism perceptions to investigate anti-plagiarism measures. J Appl Res High Educ. 2020;13(2):561-576.
  24. Nguyen DTT. University students' understandings, attitudes, and experiences on plagiarism. Cypriot J Educ Sci. 2021;16(4):1471-1478.
  25. Kassim SA, Nasir NF, Johari NR, Razali NFY. Academic dishonesty intentions in the perspectives of higher education in Malaysia. South Florida J Develop. 2021;2(5):7991-8000.
  26. Thomas D. Factors that explain academic dishonesty among university students in Thailand. Ethic Behav. 2017;27(2):140-154.
  27. Malik MA, Mahroof A, Ashraf MA. Online university students' perceptions on the awareness of, reasons for, and solutions to plagiarism in higher education: The development of the AS&P Model to combat plagiarism. Appl Sci. 2021;11(24):12055.
  28. Winardi RD, Mustikarini A, Anggraeni MA. Academic dishonesty among accounting students: Some Indonesian evidence. J Akunt Keuan Indones. 2017;14(2):142-164.
  29. Dyer JM, Pettyjohn HC, Saladin S. Academic dishonesty and testing: How student beliefs and test settings impact decisions to cheat. J Nation Colleg Test Associat. 2020;4(1). https://dc.cod.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=testing_pubs
  30. Hollman T, Palmer N, Chaffin D, Luthans K. Lying, cheating, & stealing: Strategies for mitigating technology-driven academic dishonesty in collegiate schools of business. Mount Plain J Business Technol. 2021;22(1):30-50.
  31. Peled Y, Eshet Y, Barczyk C, Grinautski K. Predictors of academic dishonesty among undergraduate students in online and face-to-face courses. Comp Educ. 2019;131:49-59.
  32. Costley J. Student perceptions of academic dishonesty at a cyber-university in South Korea. J Academ Ethic. 2018;17(2):205-217.
  33. Jereb E, Perc M, Lämmlein B, Jerebic J, Urh M, Podbregar I, Šprajc P. Factors influencing plagiarism in higher education: A comparison of German and Slovene students. PLoS One. 2018;13(8):e0202252.
  34. Alimorad Z. The good, the bad, or the ugly: Examining Iranian EFL university teachers' and graduate students' perceptions of plagiarism. TEFLIN J. 2018;29(1):19-44.
  35. Babaii E, Atai MR, Fazlollahi E. Plagiarism and academic literacies: The case of iraniangraduate students of agricultural sciences. J Modern Res Eng Lang Stud. 2021;8(2):145-170.
  36. Henning MA, Chen Ya, Ram S, Malpas Ph. Describing the attributional nature of academic dishonesty. Med Sci Educ. 2019;29(2):577-581.
  37. Abbasi P, Yoosefi-Lebni J, Jalali A, Ziapour A, Nouri P. Causes of the plagiarism: A grounded theory study. Nurs Ethic. 2021;28(2):282-296.
  38. Aljurf S, Kemp LJ, Williams P. Exploring academic dishonesty in the middle east: a qualitative analysis of students' perceptions. Stud High Educ. 2019;7(45):1461-1473.
  39. Vučković D, Peković S, Blečić M, Đoković R. Attitudes towards cheating behavior during assessing students' performance: student and teacher perspectives. Int J Educ Integr. 2020;16:13.
  40. Lee SD, Kuncel NR, Gau J. Personality, attitude, and demographic correlates of academic dishonesty: A meta-analysis. Psychol Bull. 2020;146(11):1042-1058.
  41. Patak AA, Wirawan H, Abduh A, Hidayat R, Iskandar I, Dirawan GD. Teaching English as a foreign language in Indonesia: University lecturers' views on plagiarism. J Academ Ethic. 2020;19:571-587.
  42. Mâță L, Lazăr IM, Ghiațău R. Exploring academic dishonesty practices among science education university students. J Baltic Sci Educ. 2020;19(1):91-107.
  43. Comas-Forgas R, Sureda-Negre J. Academic plagiarism: Explanatory factors from students' perspective. J Academ Ethic. 2010;8:217-232.
  44. Javed A. Predicting the underlying factors of academic dishonesty by university students: A case study. Electron Res J Social Sci Human. 2019;1(1):86-100.
  45. Kondratenko YP, Kondratenko NY. Soft computing analytic models for increasing the efficiency of fuzzy information processing in decision support systems. In: Decision-Making: Processes, Behavioral Influences and Role in Business Management (pp. 41–77). Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers; 2015.
  46. Kondratenko Y, Kondratenko G, Sidenko I. Multi-criteria decision making for selecting a rational IoT platform. In: Proceedings of 2018 IEEE 9th International Conference on Dependable Systems, Services and Technologies, DESSERT 2018 (pp. 147–152). Kyiv: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2018.
  47. Zelenin V. Group training and team coaching as practices of personnel leadership development: A comparative analysis. Sci Stud Soc Politic Psychol. 2023;51(54):39-50. https://doi.org/10.61727/sssppj/1.2023.39
  48. Kussainova A, Rakhimberdinova M, Denissova O, Taspenova G, Konyrbekov M. Improvement of technological modernization using behavioral economics. J Environ Manag Tour. 2018;9(7):1470–1478.
  49. Suchanek M, Szmelter-Jarosz A. Car enthusiasm during the second and fourth waves of COVID-19 pandemic. Human Soc Sci Commun. 2023;10(1):593.
  50. Suchanek M, Wołek M. The Relations Between the Bikesharing Systems and Public Expenditures. Cluster Analysis of the Polish Bikesharing Systems. In: Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics (pp. 37–45). Sopot: Springer Science and Business Media; 2018
  51. Poier S, Suchanek M. The effects of higher-order human values and conspiracy beliefs on COVID-19-related behavior in Germany. J Publ Health (Germany). 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-024-02210-5.
  52. Tran K, Nguyen T, Phan L, Tran M, Trinh M, Pham L. Stakeholders’ attitudes towards the installations of closed-circuit television cameras in reducing school violence. Heliyon. 2022;8(9):e10645.
  53. Nguyen HL, Tran K, Doan PLN, Nguyen T. Demand for Mobile Health in Developing Countries During COVID-19: Vietnamese's Perspectives from Different Age Groups and Health Conditions. Patient Prefer Adher. 2022;16:265–284.
  54. Gozhyj A, Kalinina I, Gozhyj V, Vysotska V. Web service interaction modeling with colored petri nets. Proceed10th IEEE Int Conf Intell Data Acquis Adv Comp Syst: Technol Applic, IDAACS 2019. 2019;1:319–323.
  55. Musabekova GT, Kulahmet M, Dzhazdykbaeva MB, Halilaeva EZ, Shalabaeva ZS, Otegen BA. Moral upbringing of junior schoolchildren in formation of educational activity. Life Sci J. 2014;11(4):404–410.
  56. Kulakhmet M, Hajrullina A, Oleksiuk N, Tvrdon M, Protas O, Ragozina V. Professional Training of Managers in the Information and Educational Environment of Universities. J High Educ Policy Leader Stud. 2022;3(2):53–70.
Make a Submission

Indexing

info@physics.uz.ua