Guilty in Whose Eyes University Students' Perceptions of Plagiarism

1
Guilty in Whose Eyes? University Students'
Perceptions of Plagiarism Cheating

• Susan HerzogApril 23, 2003

2

Guilty in Whose Eyes? University Students'
Perceptions of Plagiarism Cheating in Academic
Work and Assessment

• Peter Ashworth, Philip Bannister Pauline
  ThorneLearning Teaching Research
  GroupSheffield Hallam University, UK Studies in
  Higher Education 1997
• Volume 22, 187-203.
• Full Text Available via Academic Search Elite

3

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Understanding the student perspective on
  cheating plagiarism can significantly assist
  academics in their efforts to communicate
  appropriate norms.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

4

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Almost without exception, published work on
  cheating plagiarism among students in higher
  education, uses questionnaires that take for
  granted shared understanding of the issues
  involved.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne,
  1997)

5

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Study reports use of qualitative
• methodology attempts to
• discover student perception of
• cheating plagiarism without
• presupposing that students start from the same
  premises as academics.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

6

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Key Findings
• Strong moral basis to students'
• views, which focus on such values
• as friendship, interpersonal trust
• good learning.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

7

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Key Findings
• Implications some punishable
• behaviour can be regarded as
• justifiable some officially
• approved behaviour can be felt to
• be dubious.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

8

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Key Findings
• Notion of plagiarism is regarded
• as extremely unclear some
• students have a fear that they
• might well plagiarise unwittingly, in
• writing what they genuinely take to
• be their own ideas.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

9

Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Key Findings
• Factors such as alienation from the
• university, due to lack of contact with
• staff, the impact of large classes, the
• greater emphasis on group learning are
• perceived by students themselves as
• facilitating and sometimes excusing
• cheating.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

10
Guilty in Whose Eyes?

• Cheating is a definite moral issue. Practices
  which have a detrimental effect on other
  students, either directly or indirectly, are
  particularly serious and reprehensible. The ethic
  of fellow-feeling or peer loyalty is a dominant
  one.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

11
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Cheating Plagiarism as
a Moral Issue

• Where 'cutting corners' is at the cost of
  learning, whether 'officially' cheating or not,
  it is bad practice. Where cheating entails some
  element of learning it is relatively acceptable.
  The ethic of learning matters here.
  (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

12
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Cheating Plagiarism as
a Moral Issue

• Cheating is a definite moral issue, but the
  'official' university view of cheating is not
  always appropriate. Student practices which are
  accepted by the university may not be thoroughly
  justifiable in the eyes of students. Equally, the
  university can punish practices which seem
  relatively harmless.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

13
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Cheating Plagiarism as
a Moral Issue

• Although the student outlook differs from that
  of the university, the official regulations are
  definitive. If behaviours which might otherwise
  appear morally or ethically suspect are approved
  or tolerated by the staff, they cannot class as
  cheating.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne,
  1997)

14
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Cheating Plagiarism as
a Moral Issue

• The hazy nature of plagiarism. It can be very
  difficult to work out what constitutes
  plagiarism.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

15
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Cheating Plagiarism as
a Moral Issue

• Students are anxious that it might occur by
  accident.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

16
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Personal reactions to those who cheat. Although
  other people's cheating may be found morally
  offensive, it remains a matter for individual
  choice unless one is personally affected by it.
  Passing judgment on those who cheat without
  knowing their motivations is not fair.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

17
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Gauging the seriousness of cheating
• Extensive, intended cheating leading to
  substantial gain is the most serious. Signs of
  intention or premeditation lead to the cheating
  being taken more seriously than if it occurs
  inadvertently. It also seems that cheating which
  is blatant can be more readily accepted than that
  which is surreptitious (indicating artlessness
  rather than premeditated intention to deceive).
  (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

18
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Examination cheating is seen as more serious
  than coursework cheating the contravention of
  obvious regulations indicates blatancy,
  students should act loyally as fellow sufferers
  in examinations--the ethic of peer loyalty is
  contravened.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

19
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Cheating which occurs at a relatively low
  academic level, or in the context of formative
  assessment, is less serious. In the instance of
  plagiarism
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

20
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Certain issues are controversial--the copying of
  another student's work with their consent, the
  use of extenuating circumstances to obtain
  preferential treatment.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

21
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Reasons why cheating occurs
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne,
  1997)

22
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Plagiarism can be a deliberate course of action
  if the source material expresses a point well or
  succinctly.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne,
  1997)

23
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Cheating is a strategy for coping with the
  demands of higher education level work and the
  pressure to succeed. It is not necessarily
  habitual students who are normally hardworking
  may resort to it on occasion.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

24
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Justifications for consciously engaging in
  behaviours which you know to be wrong. Life is
  competitive, not to cheat might jeopardise your
  future.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

25
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• There are shortcomings within the university
  environment
• the form of assessment is flawed
• resources the teaching are
• inadequate
• the work is not of any larger
• significance
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

26
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Personal inhibitions to cheating. There are
  positive reasons for not cheating self-respect,
  maturity, having the ability to envisage other
  solutions.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

27
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• Cheating is discouraged through fear of the
  possible consequences (e.g. guilt
  self-recrimination shame resulting from the
  disapproval of others).
• (Ashworth,
  Bannister Thorne, 1997)

28
Guilty in Whose Eyes? Personal Reactions to
Cheating

• If the cheating has a victim, the proximity of
  that victim influences readiness to cheat.
  Students are inhibited from cheating when the
  victim can be conceived of in personal terms, not
  if they are unknown or abstract.
• (Ashworth, Bannister Thorne, 1997)

29
Guilty in Whose Eyes? The University

• Student reactions to official guidance. Cheating
  seems to be a low-key issue for the university
  the regulations are sometimes vague, with
  responsibility for understanding them placed on
  the student. It is assumed that students
  instinctively know what does and does not
  constitute acceptable practice.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

30
Guilty in Whose Eyes? The University

• The meaning of penalties for
• cheating. A genuine lack of
• knowledge of the penalties should
• serve as a mitigating factor.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

31
Guilty in Whose Eyes? The University

• The track record of a student
• caught cheating should, ideally,
• be taken into account when
• determining a penalty, but this is
• administratively hard .
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

32
Guilty in Whose Eyes?The University

• It's the university's fault that students
• cheat. Behaviours which are classed
• as cheating are sometimes allowed or
• actively encouraged by particular
• situations and/or tutors.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

33
Guilty in Whose Eyes?The University

• Factors facilitating cheating.
• Certain forms of cheating are
• comparatively easy to get away
• within higher education.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

34
Guilty in Whose Eyes?The University

• Different forms of assessment
• offer different opportunities for
• cheating.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

35
Guilty in Whose Eyes?The University

• Ease of cheating differs between
• disciplines.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

36
Guilty in Whose Eyes?The University

• Group work situations provoke
• questions over the assessment of
• levels of contribution.
• (Ashworth, Bannister
  Thorne, 1997)

37
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism and the
Evaluation of Assignments

• Gail A. U. Overbey Shawn F. Guiling
• Southeast Missouri State University
• Journal on Excellence in College Teaching,
• 1999
• Volume 10(3), 3-22.

38
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism the
Evaluation of Assignments

• The authors examined perceptions
• about plagiarism, correct source
• citation, the evaluation of written
• assignments containing plagiarized
• material among 156 college students.
• (Overbey Guiling,
  1999)

39
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism the
Evaluation of Assignments

• Great variability existed both in the
• students' knowledge/recognition of
• citation methods in their
• perceptions about the best and fairest
• way to evaluate plagiarized
• assignments.
• (Overbey
  Guiling, 1999)

40
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism the
Evaluation of Assignments

• Most students indicated that
• grades should reflect students'
• time effort that they should be
• given the opportunity to redo the
• assignment before determining a
• final grade.
• (Overbey
  Guiling, 1999)

41
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism the
Evaluation of Assignments

• The authors' findings concur with
• previous research about student
• knowledge of plagiarism
• support the need for active-
• learning exercises devoted to the
• prevention of plagiarism.
• (Overbey
  Guiling, 1999)

42
Student Perceptions of Plagiarism the
Evaluation of Assignments

• Key findings
• Estimated 40-70 have cheated in
• college
• 2/3 paraphrased without citing sources
• More than 50 plagiarized text
• Students view plagiarism in a paper as
• a less serious infraction than cheating on a
  test
• (Overbey Guiling, 1999)

43
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Arlene Franklyn-Stokes Stephen E.
  NewsteadStudies in Higher Education 1995Vol. 20
  Issue 2

44
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Series of studies across different academic
• disciplines different institutions in Great
• Britain.
• Development of a comprehensive
• set of teaching behaviors based on
• assessment of staff and student perceptions
• of cheating
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

45
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Discussion of the data with
• respect to
• Age
• Gender
• discipline institution
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

46
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Literature Review
• Davis et al. (1992) sampled over 6000
• students in both high schools colleges.
• Respondents asked if they thought it was
• wrong to cheat if they had cheated in an
• examination in high school and/or college.
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

47
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Literature Review
• Paradox while over 90 thought
• cheating was wrong, 76 reported that
• they had cheated on an exam.
• (Davis et al., 1992)

48
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Key findings
• Cheating less common at college than at high
  school.
• Males admit to more cheating than females.
• (Davis et al., 1992)

49
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Key findings
• Stress pressure for good grades main reasons
  for cheating.
• Cheating is seldom detected,
• even when it is, action is only
• rarely taken.
• (Davis et al., 1992)

50
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Current attitudes may be due
• to external circumstances.
• Fass (1990)

51
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Today's college students have
• been raised in an era of decline of
• public morality, involving scandal
• corruption by public servants,
• major corporations and private
• citizens . . .
• Fass (1990)

52
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• This same generation of students is also
• aware of widely publicized examples of
• unethical behavior occurring within
• academe major cheating scandals
• at universities the exposure of
• fraudulent fabrication of data by scientific
• researchers at a number of leading
• universities. . . Fass (1990)

53
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Plagiarism at two major dailies raises anew
• the issue of a newspaper's implicit contract
• with its readers.
• Every schoolchild is taught the impropriety of
• claiming credit for someone else's work.
• Henry III, W.A. Hajratwala, M. (1991).
  Recycling in
• the newsroom. Time, 138(4).

54
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• A number of popular authors reporters have
• been accused of, or came forward admitting to,
• plagiarism recently (e.g. Stephen Ambrose Doris
  
• Kearns Goodwin).
• Michael Bellesiles has been accused of
  fabricating
• data for his book on historical gun ownership and
  
• the Second Amendment.
• 
  (Pearson, 2003)

55
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Criticism of several U.S. historians include the
  book
• John Adams by David McCullough, the problems of
• academic historians with Michael Beschloss and
  his
• works allegations of plagiarism against Doris
• Kearns Goodwin and Stephen E. Ambrose.
• Nelson, Michael (2002). The good, the bad, and
  the
• phony Six famous historians and their critics.
• Virginia Quarterly Review, 78(3), p377.

56
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Scandals associated with books bookselling
• Plagiarism accusations against historians Doris
• Kearns Goodwin Stephen Ambrose impact of the
• trading scandal involving businesswoman Martha
• Stewart Effect of the government investigation
  of
• General Electric chief executive officer Jack
  Welch
• on his autobiography.
•  
• Danford, Natalie (2002). Scandal's Lessons.
• Publishers Weekly, 249(43).

57
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Richmond Times-Dispatch reported on
• Nov. 26, 2002, that the last of the trials
• dealing with cheaters at the University
• of Virginia has ended. A total of 48
• students were dismissed
• (Pearson, 2003)

58
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Louisiana State University is being
• investigated by the NCAA (again) for
• academic misconduct, including
• plagiarism, by athletes.
• (Pearson, 2003)

59
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• And most recently
• British intelligence report on Iraq sent
• by Tony Blair to Secretary of State
• Colin Powell
• (Cockburn, 2003)

60
Societys Impact on Academic Dishonesty

• The media promotes a dog-eat-dog mentality
• Success at any cost
• Lying dishonesty dramatized almost glorified
  on TV movies.
• (slide by Tegtmeier, 2002)

61
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Key findings
• Perhaps the least surprising aspect of
• these results was the inverse relationship
• between the perceived frequency and
• seriousness of cheating behaviour.
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

62

Students Attitudes on Cheating .just a fact
of life

• Maybe when our parents were growing up
• or their parents were growing up, it was a lot
• tighter and stricter on people cheating.
• Today it's just not happening. I think grown-
• ups have gotten a little bit more with-it in
• terms of knowing that you're just going to
• kind of cheat.
• (McCabe, 1999)

63
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• The six types of behaviour rated as
• most serious were also rated as the six
• least frequent.
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

64
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• These types of behaviour, in rank order of
• seriousness, were
• a student taking an examination for someone else
  or having someone else take an examination for
  them
• taking unauthorised material into an examination
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

65
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• 3. illicitly gaining advance information about
  the contents of an examination paper
• 4. copying another student's coursework without
  their knowledge
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

66
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• 5. copying from a neighbour during an
• examination without them realising
• 6. premeditated collusion between two or
• more students to communicate answers to
• each other during an examination
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

67
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Least serious involved plagiarism of one
• kind or another. The two items involving
• fabrication (of data and of references) were
• given low seriousness ratings, and both
• were perceived to have been carried out by
• 47 of students.
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

68
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Another feature of the
• frequency/seriousness relationship was that
• items rated least frequent and most serious
• tended to be examination-related, whereas
• those rated as most frequent and least
• serious were, on the whole, coursework-
• related.
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

69
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• There was a significant difference in
• reported cheating by age
• 18-20 year-olds reported an average cheating rate
  of 30
• 21-24 year-olds one of 36
• over 25 one of 30
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

70
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Reasons for cheating varied to a certain extent
  in
• relation to the behaviour. For example, 'to help
  a
• friend' typically appeared with coursework items,
  
• such as
• 'allowing own coursework to be copied by another
  student
• 'doing another student's coursework for them'.
  
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

71
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Reasons for cheating
• 'time pressure'
• 'to increase the mark'
• (Franklyn-Stokes
  Newstead)

72
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Why students cheat the main reasons
• UK time pressure desire to increase
• the mark
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)
• US stress pressure for good grades
• (Haines et al., 1986
  Davis et al., 1992)

73
Top Reasons to Cheat

• Pressure to do well
• The ease of obtaining information online makes
  cheating almost irresistible
• The college workload can be overwhelming and
  students would rather cheat than fail
• (Slide by Tegtmeier, 2002)

(Data from Dick, Sheard Markham, 2001)
74
Why do students cheat?

• Some students do
• not come to higher
• education seeking an
• education.
• Instead, they want a
• credential that will
• get them a job.
• Learning is not a
• priority, getting a good
• job at graduation is.

(Slide by Lorenzen Julier, 2000)  
75
This does not relate to my major...

• Some students resent having to take
• courses not directly tied to their major.
• They see university general education
• requirements as a waste of their time.

(Lorenzen Julier, 2000)
76
GPA

• Many students feel intense pressure to
• maintain a high grade point average.
• This can come from friends and family.
• Students also feel high grades are
• necessary for getting a good job or
• getting into the graduate program of
• their choice. Plagiarized papers are
• seen as a way of keeping the GPA high
• without all the work.
• 
  (Lorenzen Julier, 2000)

77
Self-defense

• Other students in the university are
• cheating. This may give them an
• unfair advantage over students who do
• not cheat, particularly if a course is
• graded on a curve.
• Plagiarism in response to the cheating
• of others is a way for some students to
• level the playing field.
• 
  (Lorenzen Julier, 2000)

78
I am too busy to write

• Some students
• plagiarize because they
• do not have a lot of free
• time.
• They may be busy with
• heavy class loads,
• multiple jobs, family
• obligations, social
• activities, and resume
• building experiences.

(Slide by Lorenzen Julier, 2000)
79
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• Reasons for not cheating
• unnecessary/pointless
• it is immoral/dishonest
• (Franklyn-Stokes
  Newstead)

80
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• An open-ended question asked students to
• give the main reason(s) why they were
• studying for a degree
• 'Stop gap'--a degree was a means of avoiding
  working, of averting the possibility of
  unemployment, or providing a breathing space,
  etc.
• (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

81
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• 'Means to an end'--a degree was seen as a way of
  enhancing job prospects, improving life style via
  a better job/salary, changing career, etc.
• 'Personal'--the degree was about personal
  achievement, intrinsic interest in the subject
  studied, etc.
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

82
Undergraduate Cheating Who Does What and Why?

• There was no relationship between the
• reason students gave for studying for a
• degree the amount of cheating they
• admitted to.
• It might be expected intuitively, that
• students who gave reasons in the 'personal'
• category would indulge in less cheating
• than the other categories, but this was not
• the case.
• 
  (Franklyn-Stokes Newstead)

83
How Prevalent is Plagiarism and Cheating?

• A poll conducted by US News and
• World Reports found that 90 of
• students believe that cheaters are
• either never caught or have never been
• appropriately disciplined.

84
How Prevalent is Plagiarism and Cheating?

• A national survey published in Education
• Week found that 54 of students admitted
• to plagiarizing from the Internet, 74 of
• students admitted that at least once during
• the past school year they had engaged in
• serious cheating, and 47 of students
• believe their teachers sometimes choose to
• ignore students who are cheating.

85
How Prevalent is Plagiarism and Cheating?

• McCabe study
• Business students 87 admit to cheating at
  least once during their college careers
• Engineering majors, 74
• Science majors, 67
• Humanities students 63

86
Bibliography
Ashworth, P., Bannister, P. Thorne, P. (1997),
Guilty in whose eyes? University students'
perceptions of Cheating and Plagiarism in
Academic Work and Assessment. Studies of Higher
Education, 22 (2), 187-203. Cockburn, A.
(2003). The Great 'Intelligence' Fraud, Nation,
276(8), 8.   Danford, Natalie (2002). Scandal's
Lessons. Publishers Weekly, 249(43).  
87
Bibliography
Davis, S. F. (1997). Cheating in high school is
for grades, cheating in college is for a career
academic dishonesty in the 1990s. Kansas Biology
Teacher 6, 70-81. Davis, S. F., Grover, C. A.,
Becker, A. H., McGregor, L. N. (1992). Academic
dishonesty Prevalence, determinants, techniques,
and punishments. Teaching of Psychology, 19,
16-20.
88
Bibliography
Dick, M., Sheard, J. Markham, S. The reasons
for student cheating A survey of postgraduate
students. School of Computer Science and Software
Engineering, Monash University, Australia.
Retrieved March 30, 2003 http//www.icce2001.org/
cd/pdf/p08/Au102.pdf Fass, R.A. (1990) Cheating
and plagiarism, in W. M. May (Ed.). Ethics and
Higher Education. New York Macmillan.
89
Bibliography
Franklyn-Stokes, A., Newstead, S. E. (1995).
Undergraduate cheating Who does what and why?
Studies in Higher Education, 20, 159-172.
Haines, V. J., Kiefhoff, G. M., Labeff, E. E.,
Clark, R. (1986). College cheating Immaturity,
lack of commitment, and the neutralizing
attitude. Research in Higher Education, 25,
342-354. Henry III, W.A. Hajratwala, M.
(1991). Recycling in the newsroom. Time, 138(4).
 
90
Bibliography
Kleiner, C. Lord, M. (1999). The cheating game.
U.S.News World Report (22). Lorenzen, M.
Julier, L. (2000). Dealing with Cut and Paste
Student Plagiarism. Michigan State University
Libraries. Retrieved March 30, 2003
http//www.lib.msu.edu/lorenze1/lilly/lilly.ppt M
cCabe, D. (1999). Academic Dishonesty Among High
School Students. Adolescence 34, 681-687.
91
Bibliography
McCabe, D. L., Cole, S. (1995). Student
collaboration Not always what the instructor
wants. American Association for Higher Education
Bulletin, 48, 3-6. McCabe, D. L., Trevino, L.
K. (1996, January/February). What we know about
cheating in college Longitudinal trends and
recent developments. Change, 28-33. McCabe, D.
L., Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and
contextual influences on academic dishonesty A
multicampus investigation. Research in Higher
Education, 38, 379-396.
92
Bibliography
McCabe, D., Bowers, W.J. (1994). Academic
dishonesty among males in college A thirty year
perspective. Journal of College Student
Development, 35, 5-10. Nelson, Michael (2002).
The good, the bad, and the phony Six famous
historians and their critics. Virginia Quarterly
Review, 78(3), p377.Overbey, G. A. U.,
Guiling, S. F. (1999). Student perceptions of
plagiarism and the evaluation of assignments.
Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 10
(3), 3-22.
93
Bibliography
Pearson, G. Electronic plagiarism seminar. Noreen
Reale Falcone Library, Le Moyne College.
Retrieved March 30, 2003 http//www.lemoyne.edu/l
ibrary/plagiarism.htm    Tegtmeier, L. (2002).
Download your workload Cheating and plagiarism
on the internet. University of Rhode Island.
Retrieved March 30, 2003 http//csc101.cs.uri.edu
/files/storage/LTEG2422/hpr108b.ppt