This experiment uses quantitative and qualitative measures to address the effect of two syllabus statements on academic misconduct: one based on prohibitions and one on academic integrity. Students expressed favorable attitudes toward the statements, showed an increase in guilt compared to a control group, but showed no decrease in intentions to cheat. Including only a standard academic misconduct statement in one's syllabus is not sufficient to alter behavior, which should be acknowledged by faculty.

What effect does witnessing other students cheat have on one's own cheating behavior? What roles do moral attitudes and neutralizing attitudes (justifications for behavior) play when deciding to cheat? The present research proposes a model of academic dishonesty which takes into account each of these variables. Findings from experimental (vignette) and survey methods determined that seeing others cheat increases cheating behavior by causing students to judge the behavior less morally reprehensible, not by making rationalization easier. Witnessing cheating also has unique (...) effects, controlling for other variables. (shrink)

This study examined self-reported academic dishonesty at a midsize public university. Students (N = 492) rated the likelihood they would cheat after accepting to abide by each of eight honor code pledges before Internet-based assignments and examinations. The statements were derived from honor pledges used by different universities across the United States and varied in length, formality, and the extent to which the statements included consequences for academic dishonesty. Longer, formal honor codes with consequences were associated with a lower likelihood (...) to cheat. Results showed a significant three-way interaction and suggest how to best design honor codes. (shrink)