Cargando…
Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter?
Using Reidenbach and Robin’s Multidimensional Ethics Scale, this study designs three scenarios related to academic dishonesty (AD) dilemmas to explore students’ moral philosophies, behavioral intentions, and ethical judgments and further examines whether students with different individual factors (i...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9017647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35450332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.857943 |
_version_ | 1784688823732535296 |
---|---|
author | Huang, Chiao Ling Yang, Shu-Ching Yang, Chun-An |
author_facet | Huang, Chiao Ling Yang, Shu-Ching Yang, Chun-An |
author_sort | Huang, Chiao Ling |
collection | PubMed |
description | Using Reidenbach and Robin’s Multidimensional Ethics Scale, this study designs three scenarios related to academic dishonesty (AD) dilemmas to explore students’ moral philosophies, behavioral intentions, and ethical judgments and further examines whether students with different individual factors (i.e., culture of place, gender, and educational level) have differences in the above variables. A total of 605 students from two areas, Taiwan and Mainland China, participated in this study. The results indicated that Taiwanese students had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies in the duplicate submission scenario than Mainland China students. They also had stricter moral equity and relativism philosophies in the incomplete citation scenario. Similarly, relatively harsh relativism and contractualism philosophies accompanied by a low level of willingness to be a perpetrator in the failure to cite research published in other countries scenario were found. In addition, females applied relatively harsh moral equity and utilitarianism to all scenarios, reporting that they and their peers were less likely to engage in all AD activities. Graduates had a stricter egoism attitude toward duplicate submission and had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies toward the behavior of incomplete citation. Graduate students also had strict moral equity, relativism, egoism, and contractualism beliefs in the failure to cite the foreign research scenario. Finally, regression analysis showed that moral equity, contractualism, and self-behavioral intention are significant predictors of students’ ethical evaluations in the three scenarios. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9017647 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90176472022-04-20 Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? Huang, Chiao Ling Yang, Shu-Ching Yang, Chun-An Front Psychol Psychology Using Reidenbach and Robin’s Multidimensional Ethics Scale, this study designs three scenarios related to academic dishonesty (AD) dilemmas to explore students’ moral philosophies, behavioral intentions, and ethical judgments and further examines whether students with different individual factors (i.e., culture of place, gender, and educational level) have differences in the above variables. A total of 605 students from two areas, Taiwan and Mainland China, participated in this study. The results indicated that Taiwanese students had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies in the duplicate submission scenario than Mainland China students. They also had stricter moral equity and relativism philosophies in the incomplete citation scenario. Similarly, relatively harsh relativism and contractualism philosophies accompanied by a low level of willingness to be a perpetrator in the failure to cite research published in other countries scenario were found. In addition, females applied relatively harsh moral equity and utilitarianism to all scenarios, reporting that they and their peers were less likely to engage in all AD activities. Graduates had a stricter egoism attitude toward duplicate submission and had stricter moral equity, relativism, and contractualism philosophies toward the behavior of incomplete citation. Graduate students also had strict moral equity, relativism, egoism, and contractualism beliefs in the failure to cite the foreign research scenario. Finally, regression analysis showed that moral equity, contractualism, and self-behavioral intention are significant predictors of students’ ethical evaluations in the three scenarios. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-04-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9017647/ /pubmed/35450332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.857943 Text en Copyright © 2022 Huang, Yang and Yang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Huang, Chiao Ling Yang, Shu-Ching Yang, Chun-An Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title | Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title_full | Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title_fullStr | Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title_full_unstemmed | Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title_short | Exploration of Students’ Perception of Academic Misconduct: Do Individual Factors, Moral Philosophy, Behavioral Intention, and Judgment Matter? |
title_sort | exploration of students’ perception of academic misconduct: do individual factors, moral philosophy, behavioral intention, and judgment matter? |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9017647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35450332 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.857943 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huangchiaoling explorationofstudentsperceptionofacademicmisconductdoindividualfactorsmoralphilosophybehavioralintentionandjudgmentmatter AT yangshuching explorationofstudentsperceptionofacademicmisconductdoindividualfactorsmoralphilosophybehavioralintentionandjudgmentmatter AT yangchunan explorationofstudentsperceptionofacademicmisconductdoindividualfactorsmoralphilosophybehavioralintentionandjudgmentmatter |