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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huang, Chiao Ling, Yang, Shu-Ching, Yang, Chun-An
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