This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Academic dishonesty (AD) is a problem that affects all higher education institutions. It hurts their reputation, undermines integrity programs, and sidelines sustainability efforts. To understand its negative impact, the empirical study of AD is a critical issue. Up to now, the majority of research on AD has taken place in the North American context. The current research analyzes the prevalence of AD in a non-American university and, focusing on individual differences, examines some of its causes and consequences. The results prove that: (1) AD is a problem that occurs frequently among students; (2) three dimensions of the big five personality model correlate with AD. These are conscientiousness (ρ = −0.49, p < 0.01), extraversion (ρ = 0.39, p < 0.01), and agreeableness (ρ = −0.14, p < 0.01); (3) AD is associated to students’ GPA (Grade Point Average) (ρ = −0.34, p < 0.01) and contextual performance (ρ = −0.50, p < 0.01); (4) personality accounts for 30% of AD variance (R = 0.55, p < 0.01); and (5) AD and some of the studied individual differences explain 38% and 41% of GPA and contextual performance variance (R = 0.62, p < 0.01 and R = 0.64, p < 0.01). Implications for research and practice are discussed.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuadrado et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: