Amie McKibban

For over 70 years, research has tackled the issue of academic misconduct in the university setting. However, a review of the literature reveals that (a) consensus on the magnitude of such behavior has not been reached, and, (b) no one with expertise in quantitative methodology has attempted to classify the behaviors that describe cheaters until Ferrell and Daniel proposed the use of the Academic Misconduct Survey (AMS). Even they, following their 1995 study, made a call for the development of understandable constructs in the measurement of cheating. Seventeen years later, the present study sought to produce such constructs. In a series of three phases of data collection, 4,100 participants completed a revised version of the AMS. A factor solution containing five factors proved to be the most interpretable. The five factors are as follows: creative padding, interactive cheating, false personal excuses, taking credit for others’ work, exam cheating. The present paper outlines the constructs proposed and discusses implications in this area for (1) scholars within the area of measurement and (2) educators with regard to student accountability and performance

Using the classroom as the unit of analyses, the current article discusses the methodological issues surrounding the literature with regard to the study of academic misconduct. Arguing for a shift in research, the present empirical investigation assesses the relationship between students' perceptions of classroom environment and academic misconduct by utilizing valid and reliable multidimensional measures with established constructs. By utilizing the classroom as the unit of analysis, a better understanding of the unique variance in academic dishonesty across classes may be established in relation to variation in students' perceptions of teaching practices. One hundred twenty-eight classes participated in the current study, with 3,151 students completing the Students' Perceptions of Teacher Effectiveness survey and Academic Misconduct Survey. Although students' overall perceptions of teacher effectiveness were not related to the rate of academic misconduct across classes, results do suggest that the lower the difficulty and workload of the course is perceived as being, the more likely students report cheating on exams, taking credit for others' work, using false personal excuses, and creatively padding their work. Reasons for these relationships are explicated, and suggestions for future research are discussed