Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Character Strengths and Ethical Engagement in Online Faculty.Justina Or, Scott Greenberger & Melissa A. Milliken - 2022 - Journal of Academic Ethics 20 (4):533-547.
    In this study, the researchers investigated the relationships between character strengths and ethical engagement in online faculty. One of the ethical duties for higher education faculty is to engage in effective teaching practices. As online higher education becomes increasingly popular, online faculty also bear this duty. Numerous studies have shown that character strengths cultivate ethical behavior. Hence, we sought to determine the relationship between character strengths and ethical engagement in online faculty. Specifically, we focused on intellectual character strengths, interpersonal character (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Relationships between Personal Values, Justifications, and Academic Cheating for Business vs. Non-Business Students.Laura Parks-Leduc, Russell P. Guay & Leigh M. Mulligan - 2022 - Journal of Academic Ethics 20 (4):499-519.
    In this study we examine college cheating behaviors of business students compared to non-business students, and investigate possible antecedents to cheating in an effort to better understand why and when students cheat. We specifically examine power values; we found that they were positively related to academic cheating in our sample, and that choice of major (business or non-business) partially mediated the relationship between power values and cheating. We also considered the extent to which students provide justifications for their cheating, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Cultural Differences in Academic Dishonesty: A Social Learning Perspective.Nhung T. Hendy, Nathalie Montargot & Antigoni Papadimitriou - 2021 - Journal of Academic Ethics 19 (1):49-70.
    In this study, we examined the role of social learning theory in explaining academic dishonesty among 673 college students in the United States, France, and Greece. We found support for social learning theory such that perceived peer dishonesty was incrementally valid as a predictor of self-reported academic dishonesty across three countries beyond personal factor of conscientiousness and demographic factor of age. Contrary to expectation, perceived penalty for academic cheating received support in the U.S. sample only. Justification for academic dishonesty contributed (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • A Study of Cheating Beliefs, Engagement, and Perception – The Case of Business and Engineering Students.Carla M. Ghanem & Najib A. Mozahem - 2019 - Journal of Academic Ethics 17 (3):291-312.
    Studies have found that academic dishonesty is widespread. Of particular interest is the case of business students since many are expected to be the leaders of tomorrow. This study examines the cheating behaviors and perceptions of 819 business and engineering students at three private Lebanese universities, two of which are ranked as the top two universities in the country. Our results show that cheating is pervasive in the universities to an alarming degree. We first analyzed the data by looking at (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Comparing Business School Faculty Classification for Perceptions of Student Cheating.Gary Blau, Roman Szewczuk, Jennifer Fitzgerald, Dennis A. Paris & Mike Guglielmo - 2018 - Journal of Academic Ethics 16 (4):301-315.
    Faculty continue to address academic dishonesty in their classes. In this follow-up to an earlier study on general perceived faculty student cheating, using a sample of business school faculty, we compared three levels of faculty classification: full-time non-tenure track, full-time tenured/tenure-track, and part-time adjuncts. Results showed that NTTs perceived higher levels for three different types of student cheating, i.e., paper-based, forbidden teamwork, and hiring someone to take an exam. In addition, NTTs were more likely to report a student for cheating. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation