IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v147y2018i1d10.1007_s10551-015-2988-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Further Understanding Factors that Explain Freshman Business Students’ Academic Integrity Intention and Behavior: Plagiarism and Sharing Homework

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy Paul Cronan

    (University of Arkansas)

  • Jeffrey K. Mullins

    (University of Arkansas)

  • David E. Douglas

    (University of Arkansas)

Abstract

Academic integrity (AI) violations on college campuses continue to be a significant concern that draws public attention. Even though AI has been the subject of numerous studies offering explanations and recommendations, academic dishonesty persists. Consequently, this has rekindled interest in understanding AI behavior and its influencers. This paper focuses on the AI violations of plagiarism and sharing homework for freshman business students, examining the factors that influence a student’s intention to plagiarize or share homework with others. Using a sample of more than 1300 freshman business students over 2 years, we modeled intent to plagiarize and intent to share homework using factors in the Theory of Planned Behavior in addition to past violation behavior and moral obligation (feelings of guilt). Based on the results of this study, attitude, perceived behavioral control, subjective norm, and in addition past behavior and moral obligation, were found to significantly influence an individual’s intention to violate academic integrity (for plagiarism and sharing homework when asked not to do so), explaining 33 and 35 % of the variance in intention to commit an AI violation for sharing homework and plagiarism, respectively. These results contribute to a better understanding of individuals’ motivations for plagiarizing and sharing homework, which is a necessary step toward reducing academic integrity violations.

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy Paul Cronan & Jeffrey K. Mullins & David E. Douglas, 2018. "Further Understanding Factors that Explain Freshman Business Students’ Academic Integrity Intention and Behavior: Plagiarism and Sharing Homework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 197-220, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:147:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2988-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2988-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10551-015-2988-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-015-2988-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dubinsky, Alan J. & Loken, Barbara, 1989. "Analyzing ethical decision making in marketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 83-107, September.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Jennifer Kisamore & Thomas Stone & I. Jawahar, 2007. "Academic Integrity: The Relationship between Individual and Situational Factors on Misconduct Contemplations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 75(4), pages 381-394, November.
    4. Shimp, Terence A & Kavas, Alican, 1984. "The Theory of Reasoned Action Applied to Coupon Usage," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 11(3), pages 795-809, December.
    5. Helen Klein & Nancy Levenburg & Marie McKendall & William Mothersell, 2007. "Cheating During the College Years: How do Business School Students Compare?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 72(2), pages 197-206, May.
    6. Kathleen Molnar & Marilyn Kletke & Jongsawas Chongwatpol, 2008. "Ethics vs. IT Ethics: Do Undergraduate Students Perceive a Difference?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(4), pages 657-671, December.
    7. Timothy Cronan & Sulaiman Al-Rafee, 2008. "Factors that Influence the Intention to Pirate Software and Media," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 527-545, April.
    8. Mark Simkin & Alexander McLeod, 2010. "Why Do College Students Cheat?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 441-453, July.
    9. Rafik Elias, 2009. "The Impact of Anti-Intellectualism Attitudes and Academic Self-Efficacy on Business Students’ Perceptions of Cheating," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 199-209, May.
    10. Bagozzi, Richard P & Baumgartner, Hans & Yi, Youjae, 1992. "State versus Action Orientation and the Theory of Reasoned Action: An Application to Coupon Usage," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 18(4), pages 505-518, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Prithvi Roy & Badrinarayan Srirangam Ramaprasad & Manan Chakraborty & Nandan Prabhu & Shreelatha Rao, 2024. "Customer Acceptance of Use of Artificial Intelligence in Hospitality Services: An Indian Hospitality Sector Perspective," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 25(3), pages 832-851, June.
    2. Liu Xin Juan & Wu Yun Tao & Palanisamy K. Veloo & Mahadevan Supramaniam, 2022. "Using Extended TPB Models to Predict Dishonest Academic Behaviors of Undergraduates in a Chinese Public University," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, November.
    3. Víctor Jesus García-Morales & Rodrigo Martín-Rojas & Raquel Garde-Sánchez, 2020. "How to Encourage Social Entrepreneurship Action? Using Web 2.0 Technologies in Higher Education Institutions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 161(2), pages 329-350, January.
    4. Shanyong Wang & Jing Wang & Feng Yang & Yu Wang & Jun Li, 2018. "Consumer familiarity, ambiguity tolerance, and purchase behavior toward remanufactured products: The implications for remanufacturers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1741-1750, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Timothy Cronan & Sulaiman Al-Rafee, 2008. "Factors that Influence the Intention to Pirate Software and Media," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 527-545, April.
    2. Amanda Chu & Patrick Chau & Mike So, 2015. "Explaining the Misuse of Information Systems Resources in the Workplace: A Dual-Process Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 131(1), pages 209-225, September.
    3. Lunardo, Renaud & Mbengue, Ababacar, 2009. "Perceived control and shopping behavior: The moderating role of the level of utilitarian motivational orientation," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 434-441.
    4. Rafik Elias, 2009. "The Impact of Anti-Intellectualism Attitudes and Academic Self-Efficacy on Business Students’ Perceptions of Cheating," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(2), pages 199-209, May.
    5. Winrow, Brian, 2016. "Do perceptions of the utility of ethics affect academic cheating?," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-12.
    6. Alfiero, Simona & Battisti, Enrico & Ηadjielias, Elias, 2022. "Black box technology, usage-based insurance, and prediction of purchase behavior: Evidence from the auto insurance sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    7. Madeleine Feder & Barbara E. Weißenberger, 2019. "Understanding the behavioral gap: Why would managers (not) engage in CSR-related activities?," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 95-126, April.
    8. Elisa Montaguti & Scott A. Neslin & Sara Valentini, 2016. "Can Marketing Campaigns Induce Multichannel Buying and More Profitable Customers? A Field Experiment," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(2), pages 201-217, March.
    9. Oguz YILDIZ & Hakan KITAPCI, 2018. "Exploring Factors Affecting Consumers¡¯ Adoption of Shopping via Mobile Applications in Turkey," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(2), pages 60-75, June.
    10. Barnett, Tim & Valentine, Sean, 2004. "Issue contingencies and marketers' recognition of ethical issues, ethical judgments and behavioral intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 338-346, April.
    11. Tracy Manly & Lori Leonard & Cynthia Riemenschneider, 2015. "Academic Integrity in the Information Age: Virtues of Respect and Responsibility," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 579-590, March.
    12. Elodie Gentina & Thomas Li-Ping Tang & Qinxuan Gu, 2017. "Does Bad Company Corrupt Good Morals? Social Bonding and Academic Cheating among French and Chinese Teens," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 146(3), pages 639-667, December.
    13. Brenda Nguyen & Mary Crossan, 2022. "Character-Infused Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(1), pages 171-191, June.
    14. Sreen, Naman & Purbey, Shankar & Sadarangani, Pradip, 2018. "Impact of culture, behavior and gender on green purchase intention," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 177-189.
    15. Barbara Culiberg & Domen Bajde, 2014. "Do You Need a Receipt? Exploring Consumer Participation in Consumption Tax Evasion as an Ethical Dilemma," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(2), pages 271-282, October.
    16. Smith, Kenneth J. & Emerson, David J. & Mauldin, Shawn, 2021. "Online cheating at the intersection of the dark triad and fraud diamond," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    17. Ralph Jackson & Charles Wood & James Zboja, 2013. "The Dissolution of Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations: A Comprehensive Review and Model," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 233-250, August.
    18. Catherine Janssen & Joëlle Vanhamme, 2015. "Theoretical Lenses for Understanding the CSR–Consumer Paradox," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 130(4), pages 775-787, September.
    19. Anastasiou Kartas & Sigi Goode, 2012. "Use, perceived deterrence and the role of software piracy in video game console adoption," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 261-277, April.
    20. Simon, Françoise, 2016. "Consumer adoption of No Junk Mail stickers: An extended planned behavior model assessing the respective role of store flyer attachment and perceived intrusiveness," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 12-21.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:147:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10551-015-2988-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.