Cheating behavior among high school and college

students: Student characteristics and situational factors

Ravinder Koul1
1. Associate Professor, Penn State University, Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies,
Malvern, Pa, 19355, USA. Email: RXK141@PSU.EDU

Abstract
The growing recognition of cheating as a cross-cultural problem urges educators and
researchers to investigate what is the motivation for such academic behavior. This paper
reports the results of two different investigations. The first survey study investigated the
relationship between achievement goal orientation and self-reported copying behaviour
among college students (N = 2007) enrolled in five different academic programs.

The

volunteer participants were college students enrolled in three public universities and two
vocational/technical colleges in Thailand. We found that compared to humanities students,
management, engineering, science, and vocational students were significantly reported
significantly higher frequency of copying behaviour.

The second survey study tested a

conceptual model of the combined influence of individual attributesmaterialism,

religiosity, achievement goalson high school students propensity to cheat, their selfreported cheating behavior, and the influence of gender and curricular context. Participants
were ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth grade high school students from central Thailand (N
= 2123). The path analysis showed that materialism and performance avoidance goals were
positively associated with both student willingness to cheat and the frequency of self-reported
cheating behaviour. We use self-determination and achievement goal theories to interpret the
effects of multiple goals, values and institutional environment on academic behaviour of
students, and the influence of curricular context.
Keywords: Motivation, academic behavior, cheating behavior

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

Background
Student cheating occurs across national contexts and has been reported to be on the
rise (e.g., Kidder & Verschoor, 2002; Lin & Wen, 2007; McCabe, 1997; Smyth & Davis,
2004; Songsriwittaya, Koul, & Kongsuwan, 2010). McCabe (1997) replicated an earlier
survey study to find that the percentage of American college students who reported cheating
on college exams increased from 26% in 1963 to 52% in 1993 and cheating on college
assignments increased from 11% in 1963 to 49% in 1993. In 2002, The Josephson Institute
of Ethics in California, USA found that 72% of the American high school students who were
surveyed admitted to cheating on an examination within the prior 12 months (up from 70% in
2000, and 61% in 1992). The increases of student cheating are concurrent with findings
reported by the American Council of Education on changes in student value orientations:
Between 1968 and 2000, the percentage of college students who perceived a need to become
affluent increased from 41% to 73%, at the same time, the percentage of students who gave
importance to developing a meaningful philosophy of life decreased from 83% to 42%
(Kidder & Verschoor, 2002; Smyth & Davis, 2004).
As shifts in academic behaviour pull values to center stage, educators express
concerns that cheating results in unfair advantage (Bouville, 2010) and misrepresentation
of what has been learned (Lupton & Chapman, 2002); it erodes public confidence in the
value of the education our institutions provide (Whitley & Keith-Spiegel, 2002). Cheating
undermines the core values of professions for which students prepare, and cheating behaviour
may be carried over from school to college and into professional life (Davis & Ludvigson,
1995; Jones & Spraakman, 2011). Cheating behaviour in medical college has been found to
be a good predictor of unethical medical practices later on (Hrabak et al., 2004). Unethical
behaviours among college business students have been linked to a greater likelihood of
similar behaviours in the workplace (Nonis & Swift, 2001). Accountants who are willing to
engage in acts that reduce the quality of financial audits are likely to have engaged in
cheating as students (Baker, 2007; Koh, Scully, & Woodliff, 2011). Cheating is a motivated
behavior . . . it entails the intentional violation of pre-set rules in order to attain an advantage
or credit, or to increase the chance of success (Murdock & Anderman, 2006, as cited in Van
Yperen, Hamstra, & Van der Klauw, 2011, p. s6). What values inform such behaviour?

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

Research studies have examined the importance of specific values in relation to

cheating (e.g., see Rettinger & Jordan, 2005). Materialism (the value attached to worldly
possessions) (Belk, 1985; Browne & Kaldenberg, 1997) and religiosity are value orientations
that are considered to have significant influence on behaviour (Deci & Ryan, 1985;
Kilbourne, Grunhagen, & Foley, 2005; Weber, 1958). There is empirical evidence for the
influence of materialism and religiosity on cheating behaviour (e.g., Bruggeman & Hart,
1996; Conroy & Emerson, 2004; Jordan, 2003; Rawwas, Swaidan, & Al-Khatib, 2006). For
example, Jordan (2003) found that strong materialistic aspirations for social and financial
status contribute to an academic climate of dishonesty and Conroy and Emerson (2004) found
that strong religiosity is negatively associated with student acceptance of potentially unethical
business scenarios.

However, questions remain about whether research rooted in a

unidimensional conception of values adequately addresses the diversity of values that may
influence behavior in a given situation (McCabe, Dukerich, & Dutton, 1991, p. 952;
Rettinger & Jordan, 2005).
According to self-determination theory, materialism relates to motivation and
behaviour in two ways (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Kasser & Ryan, 1993, 1996): 1) It promotes the
acquisition of wealth and worldly possessions as a worthwhile goal; 2) It promotes
dissatisfaction with an existing situation in comparison to unrealized, material goals, thus
providing motivation to engage in both ethical and unethical behaviours. Religious values
provide guidance about what is important in life (Weber, 1958), and how to achieve lifelong
objectives (Shah & Marks, 2004). Since religions teach codes of ethical conduct, deep
religiosity will, presumably, be inconsistent with a willingness to cheat because it would
produce cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957).
Socio-cognitive theories of motivation (e.g., Covington, 2000; Schunk, Pintrich, &
Meece, 2008) interpret cheating behaviour in terms of achievement goals (e.g., Anderman,
2007). According to goal theory, all actions are given meaning, direction, and purpose by
the goals that individuals seek out (Covington, 2000, p. 174). In general terms, achievement
goal theory defines mastery goals as inwardly focused on mastery of a task and personal
improvement and performance goals as outwardly focused on normative outcomes, grades,
rewards, and other external evaluations and comparisons (Hyde & Durik, 2005). A student
who endorses a performance-approach goal wants to be seen as excellent or superior to
others and a student who endorses a performance-avoidance goal wants to not appear stupid
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

compared to others (e.g., Church, Elliot, & Gable, 2001). Cheating behaviour is observed
more among students who adopt performance goals and less among students who adopt
mastery goals (e.g., Anderman, 2007; Anderman & Midgley, 2004). Anderman (2007) says
that cheating serves no purpose for mastery goal oriented students because it does not lead to
authentic learning and self-improvement. On the other hand, cheating might further the goal
of maximizing scores or avoiding low scores for performance goal oriented students.
Objectives/Research questions
Research has shown that students may hold multiple goals or values at the same time
(Wentzel, 1991). The investigation reported in this paper was based on the assumption that
there may be patterns to values that related to cheating behaviour. The investigation was
designed to contribute to understanding the culture of cheating by asking the following
research questions:
1. What is the relationship between multiple goals and values and students attitudes
toward cheating? What is the influence on curricular context?
2. What is the influence of gender and professional career aspirations on students
willingness to cheat and their self-reported cheating behavior?
Research methodology
The volunteer participants for first survey were college students enrolled in three
public universities and two vocational/technical colleges in Thailand. Vocational college
students were majoring in education for applied technical fields (i.e. production engineering,
civil engineering, electrical technology, automotive technology, printing technology, multimedia, and computer and information technology). University students were majoring in
science, engineering, business and humanities. The volunteer participants for second survey
were high school students enrolled in three public universities and two vocational/technical
colleges in Thailand.

The school system in Thailand consists of six years of primary

education (called Prathom), followed by three years of lower secondary education (called
Mathayom 1, 2, 3), and three years of upper secondary education (called Mathayom 4, 5, 6).
More than 94% of responses to our surveys were complete. .

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

Our survey questionnaires were written in Thai and divided into two sections. The
first part of the survey asked for general information which included gender, grade, and
career aspiration (After completing secondary education, what profession do you intend to
choose?).

Surveys assessed materialism, religiosity, achievement goal orientation,

willingness to cheat, and self-reported cheating in math classrooms.

Each of the

measurement scales used in this study were tested and validated in prior studies (Koul, 2007;
Ontakharai, Koul, & Neanchaleay, 2008; Songsriwittaya et al., 2010).

The section on

materialism assessed the value placed on financial success and material possessions (Richins
& Dawson, 1992). The questions here were translated and adapted from Chang and Arkin
(2002) (e.g., I believe the amount of material objects people own is a sign of success). The
section on religiosity assessed the level of commitment to the perceived benefits of religion
(Ontakharai et al., 2008) (e.g., Sassana (Thai word for religion) calms my emotions when I
am upset or hurt). The achievement goal orientation section assessed mastery orientation
(e.g., I feel satisfied when I learn new things in my math class), performance approach
orientation (e.g., I feel good when I perform better than other students in math class), and
performance avoidance orientation (e.g., My main goal in math class is to avoid looking
stupid in math). The section on willingness to cheat was adapted from Lee, Whitehead, and
Ntoumanis (2007) (e.g., I would cheat if I thought it would help me). The section on selfreported cheating behaviour was adapted from The Dimensions of Plagiarism survey (Koul,
2007) (e.g., How often did you lok (Thai word for cheating) by copying math assignments
from friends).
Exploratory principle component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on
each section of the survey. Factor loadings ranged from .51 to .83 and scale reliability alpha
values ranged from .79 to .93. We used path analysis procedures with SPSS and AMOS to
test the combined influence of materialism, religiosity, and achievement goals on willingness
to cheat and self-reported cheating behaviour in math classrooms (Byrne, 2009; Joreskog &
Sorbom, 2000). Path analysis is considered a good technique to test direct and indirect
relations between variables when there is theoretical and empirical justification for the
relationship (Cook & Campbell, 1979; Mueller, 1996).

We used maximum likelihood

method to compute covariance matrices from the raw data. This estimation procedure has
been recommended for use with multivariate normally distributed data (Chou & Bentler,
1995). We chose three indexes to evaluate whether our path analysis model was a good fit:
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

Comparative-fit-index

(CFI),

norm-fit-index

(NFI),

and

root-mean-square-error-

approximation (RMSEA). Models with CFI and NFI values close to .95 and RMSEA value
less than .5 are normally considered an acceptable fit (Byrne, 2009).
We used cluster analysis which organizes data into two or more clusters (conceptually
meaningful groups) on the basis of common characteristics. We started with hierarchical
cluster analysis using Wards method, applying squared distance to determine the optimum
number of clusters. After examination of the resulting agglomeration schedule and clustering
coefficients, it was determined that a two-cluster solution was suitable. We conducted Kmeans cluster analysis on the following variables: materialism, religiosity, mastery goals,
performance-approach goals, performance-avoidance goals, willingness to cheat, and selfreported cheating behaviour.

We also examined the influence of gender and career

aspirations on cluster membership by calculating the proportion of students that fall into each
sub-group within the cluster.

Findings
The statistics associated with the path model indicate the fit to data was very good and
the model accurately accounted for the relationship obtained among measured variables. The
chi-square test (4, 2123) = 5.262, p = .261. NFI was .997 and CFI was .999, and RMSEA
was .012, all indicating a good-fitting model.
Path analysis shows that the exogenous variables of materialism and performance
goals (approach and avoidance goals) are positively associated with each other. Similarly,
mastery goals had positive association with religiosity but negligible association with
materialism. Religiosity and mastery goals had direct association and indirect association
(with the intervening variable of willingness to cheat) with self-reported cheating in math
classrooms. Materialism and performance-avoidance goals had only indirect association
(with the intervening variable of willingness to cheat) with self-reported cheating in math
classrooms.

Materialism, religiosity, mastery goals and performance-avoidance goals

accounted for 18.9% of variance in willingness to cheat.

Parameter estimates revealed that materialism and performance-avoidance goals were
positively associated with willingness to cheat (beta = .321 and .167, respectively) while
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

religiosity and mastery goals were negatively associated with willingness to cheat (beta = .107 and -.108, respectively).

The strongest total effect on willingness to cheat was

materialism followed by performance-avoidance goals, and the strongest total effect on selfreported cheating in math classrooms was mastery orientation followed by materialism.
The K-means cluster analysis organized all the survey respondents into two mutually
exclusive groups. Each cluster was comprised of students whose values and goals were more
similar to each other than to those of the students in the other cluster.

Cluster 1 (N = 983) was characterized by strong materialism, higher endorsement of

performance approach and performance-avoidance goals, higher willingness to cheat,
and higher self-reported frequency of cheating in math classrooms.

Cluster 2 (N = 1009) was characterized by weak materialism, lower endorsement of

performance approach and performance-avoidance goals, lower willingness to cheat,
and lower self-reported frequency of cheating in math classrooms.
Mean values on religiosity and mastery orientation did not differ significantly

between students in Cluster 1 and Cluster 2. A high proportion of both males and students
aspiring for business and related professions were classified into Cluster 1 (we will call it the
high willingness to cheat cluster). A high proportion of both females and students aspiring
for teaching, medicine and related professions were classified into Cluster 2 (we will call it
the low willingness to cheat cluster).

Discussion
We found that males reported higher frequency of copying behavior than females and
the frequency of self-reported copying behavior was inversely related to grade-point-average.
Ward and Beck (1990) have used gender-role socialization theory to explain gender
differences in cheating behavior. These researchers hypothesize that in a society with rigidly
defined gender roles, females are more likely than males to be socialized to obey rules and
are therefore less likely to engage in cheating behavior.

Other researchers suggest the

theoretical rationale for the influence of grade-point-average on copying behavior is that

students with lower academic achievement have more to gain and less to lose by cheating and

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

are therefore more likely to engage in copying behavior (see also Bennette, 2005; Park,
2003).
Research has shown that academic context and learning environment can influence
the goal orientations of students, which may subsequently influence their copying behavior in
a number of ways (see Kaplan & Maehr, 2007, p. 159; also Ames, 1990). Environments that
engage the student in personally meaningful and challenging tasks enhance mastery goals
while environments that result in rote learning enhance performance goals. Environments
that encourage student autonomy and responsibility enhance mastery goals whereas
environments in which students follow an authoritarian and prescribed way of learning
enhance performance goals.

Environments in which the recognition and evaluation of

learning outcomes is conducted privately enhance mastery goals whereas environments in

which the recognition and evaluation of learning outcomes is conducted publically enhance
performance goals. Students perceive the values that their academic environment supports
which in turn can influence their achievement goal orientation (e.g., Elliot & Dweck, 2005;
Gabel, 2006; Schunk et al., 2008).
We found that strong materialism was positively associated with the endorsement of
performance goals and we conclude it is because both are oriented toward external rewards
(Kasser & Ryan, 1993, 1996). This finding is consistent with the results of a prior study
carried out in Hong Kong which found that social comparison and the perception of
discrepancy between ideal and actual conditions triggers a desire for material possessions,
and vice versa (Chan & Prendergast, 2007). All of these findings are consistent with selfdetermination theory which predicts that a strong desire for material possessions encourages
social comparison (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Sirgy, 1998).
We found that mastery goals were associated with a lower willingness to cheat and
materialism and performance avoidance goals were associated with a higher willingness to
cheat. These findings are consistent with the results of prior studies that found that selfreported cheating behaviours are related positively to extrinsic goals and negatively to
intrinsic goals (e.g., Anderman & Midgley, 2004).
The two groups of students differentiated by cluster analysis differed significantly in
respect to values, goals and cheating profiles: One cluster was comprised of students who
had significantly high levels of both materialism and performance goal orientations. They
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

scored high on willingness to cheat. The other cluster was comprised of students who had
low levels of both materialism and performance goal orientations and scored low on
willingness to cheat. In this discussion, we will refer to these clusters as high willingness
to cheat and low willingness to cheat. A significantly higher proportion of males than
females were classified into the high willingness to cheat cluster.
Differences in value and goal orientations and student willingness to cheat may be
seen in light of identity theories (e.g., Aquino & Reed, 2002; Erikson, 1964; Markus &
Nurius, 1986; Reynolds & Ceranic, 2007). Individuals develop a set of beliefs about who
they are and who they would like to become (Eccles, 2009; Markus & Nurius, 1986).
According to Erikson (1964), the primary developmental task of adolescence is the formation
of a vibrant identity consistent over time and place. Every individual has the capacity to
identify with others on a multitude of variables that include, but are not limited to, shared
traits, common familial bonds, gender, and career interests (Aquino & Reed, 2002), which
motivate actions and set parameters for individual behaviour (Erikson, 1964; Reynolds &
Ceranic, 2007). Markus and Ruvolo (1989) emphasize a relationship between future-oriented
self-representation and current academic behaviour. Individuals are motivated to develop
strategies and to invest effort in the pursuit of possible-selves. Career aspirations are
possible-selves (Hoyle & Sherrill, 2006). From these theoretical perspectives, motivation is
explained by the principle of consistency in which identification with a particular gender or
group creates a need to act consistently with both personal and social identities.
Gender identity theorists have suggested that differential childhood socialization
processes contribute to differences in value orientations (Richins & Dawson, 1992). It has
been found that females tend to be socialized to hold themselves to higher moral standards
than males (Franke, Crown, & Spake, 1997) while males tend to be socialized to be more
individualistic and to perceive minor deviance and risk-taking as part of their male gender
role (Betz & OConnell, 1989; Gilligan, 1982). Similarly, our findings indicate that females
are less likely than males to emphasize money and material gains when faced with the same
set of occupational choices.

We found that both gender and career aspirations were

positively associated with values, goals, and student willingness to cheat.

There was

significant interaction between gender and professional career aspirations on the reported
willingness to cheat. Our findings provide empirical evidence for the relationship between
student identity and academic behaviour with respect to the culture of cheating. Academic
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

behaviour is influenced by the values and goals students pursue, who they think they are, and
who they want to be.

References
Anderman, E. M. (2007). The effects of personal, classroom, and school goal structures on
academic cheating. In E. M. Anderman, & T. B. Murdock (Eds.), Psychology of cheating (pp.
87-106). Burlington, MA: Academic Press.
Anderman, E. M., & Midgley, C. (2004). Changes in self-reported academic cheating across
the transition from middle school to high school. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 29,
499-517.
Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1423-1440.
Baker, R. J. (2007). Mind over matter: Why intellectual capital is the chief source of wealth.
Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Behling, O., & Law, K. S. (2000). Translating questionnaires and other research
instruments: Problems and solutions (Sage University Papers Series on Quantitative
Applications in the Social Sciences no. 07-131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Belk, R. W. (1985). Materialism: Trait aspects of living in the material world. Journal of
Consumer Research, 12(3), 265-280.
Betz, M., & O'Connell, L. (1989). Work orientations of males and females: Exploring the
gender socialization approach. Sociological Inquiry, 59(3), 318-330.
Bouville, M. (2010). Why cheating is wrong? Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29(1),
67-76.
Browne, B. A., & Kaldenberg, D. O. (1997). Conceptualizing self-monitoring: links to
materialism and product involvement. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(1), 31-44.
Bruggeman, E. L., & Hart, K. J. (1996). Cheating, lying, and moral reasoning by religious
and secular high school students. Journal of Educational Research, 89(4), 340-344.
Byrne, B. M. (2009). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications,
and programming. New York: Routledge.
Callahan, D. (2004). The cheating culture: Why more Americans are doing wrong to get
ahead (1st ed.). Florida: Harcourt, Inc.
Chan, K., & Prendergast, G. (2007). Materialism and social comparison among adolescents.
Social Behavior and Personality, 35(2), 213-228.
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

10

Chang, L., & Arkin, R. M. (2002). Materialism as an attempt to cope with uncertainty.
Psychology and Marketing, 19(5), 389-406.
Chou, C. P., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Estimates and tests in structural equation modeling. In
R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Church, M. A., Elliot, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom environment,
achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1),
43-54.
Conroy, S. J., & Emerson, T. L. (2004). Business ethics and religion: Religiosity as a
predictor of ethical awareness among students. Journal of Business Ethics, 50(4), 383-396.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues
for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Pub. Co.
Covington, M. V. (2000). Goal theory, motivation, and school achievement: An integrative
review. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 171-200.
Davis, S. F., & Ludvigson, W. H. (1995). Additional data on academic dishonesty and a
proposal for remediation. Teaching of Psychology, 22(2), 119-121.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behavior. New York: Plenum Publishing Corporation.
Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and collective
identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78-89.
Erikson, E. H. (1964). Insight and responsibility. New York: Norton.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. California: Row, Peterson and
Company.
Franke, G. R., Crown, D. F., & Spake, D. F. (1997). Gender differences in ethical perceptions
of business practices: A social role theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(6),
920-934.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Hoyle, R. H., & Sherrill, M. R. (2006). Future orientation in the self-system: Possible selves,
self- regulation, and behavior. Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1673-1696.
Hrabak, M., Vujaklija, A., Vodopivec, I., Hren, D., Marui, M., & Marui, A. (2004).
Academic misconduct among medical students in a post-communist country. Medical
Education, 38(3), 276-285.

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

11

Hyde, J. S., & Durik, A. M. (2005). Gender, competence, and motivation. In A. J. Elliot, & C.
S. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 375-391). New York: Gilford
Press.
Jones, J., & Spraakman, G. (2011). A case of academic misconduct: Does self-interest rule?
Accounting Perspectives, 10(1), 1-22.
Jordan, A. (2003). Implications of academic dishonesty for teaching in psychology. Teaching
of Psychology, 30(3), 216-219.
Jreskog, K. G., & Srbom, D. (2000). PRELIS 2: User's reference guide (3rd ed.). (L.
Stam, Ed.) Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side of the American dream: Correlates of financial
success as a central life aspiration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(2), 410422.
Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996). Further examining the American dream: Differential
correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(3),
280-287.
Kidder, R. M., & Verschoor, C. C. (2002). Entering the third age of ethics. Strategic Finance,
84 (4), 20-22.
Kilbourne, W., Grunhagen, M., & Foley, J. (2005). A cross-cultural examination of
relationship between materialism and individual values. Journal of Economic Psychology, 26,
624-641.
Koh, H. P., Scully, G., & Woodliff, D. R. (2011). The impact of cumulative pressure on
accounting students' propensity to commit plagiarism: An experimental approach. Accounting
and Finance, 51(4), 985-1005.
Koul, R. (2007). Dimensions of plagiarism. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from
http://dimensions-of-plagiarism.wikispaces.com/
Lee, M. J., Whitehead, J., & Ntoumanis, N. (2007). Development of the attitudes to Moral
Decision-making in Youth Sport Questionnaire (AMDYSQ). Psychology of Sport and
Exercise, 8 (3), 369-392.
Lin, C., & Wen, L. (2007). Academic dishonesty in higher education: A nationwide study in
Taiwan. The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 54, 8597.
Lupton, R. A., & Chapman, K. J. (2002). Russian and American college student's attitudes,
perceptions and tendencies towards cheating. Educational Research, 44, 17-27.
Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954-969.

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

12

Markus, H., & Ruvolo, A. (1989). Possible selves: Personalized representations of goals. In
L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp.211-242).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
McCabe, D. L. (1997). Classroom cheating among natural science and engineering majors.
Science and Engineering Ethics, 3(4), 433-446.
McCabe, D. L., Dukerich, M. J., & Dutton, J. E. (1991). Context, values and moral dilemmas:
Comparing the choices of business and law school students. Journal of Business Ethics,
10(12), 951-960.
McCabe, D. L., & Trevino, L. K. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic
dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education, 38(3), 379-396.
Mueller, R. O. (1996). Basic principles of structural equation modeling: an introduction to
LISREL and EQS. New York: Springer-Verlag New York.
Nonis, S., & Swift, C. O. (2001). An examination of the relationship between academic
dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Journal of Education for
Business, 77, 69-77.
Ontakharai, S., Koul, R., & Neanchaleay, J. (2008). Religious outlook and students' attitudes
toward the environment. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 29(3), 305-311.
Rawwas, M. Y., Swaidan, Z., & Al-Khatib, J. (2006). Does religion matter? A comparison
study of the ethical beliefs of marketing students of religious and secular universities in
Japan. Journal of Business Ethics, 65(1), 69-86.
Rettinger, D. A., & Jordan, A. E. (2005). The relations among religion, motivation, and
college cheating: A natural experiment. Ethics and Behavior, 15(2), 107-129.
Reynolds, S. J., & Ceranic, T. L. (2007). The effects of moral judgment and moral identity on
moral behavior: An empirical examination of the moral individual. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92(6), 1610-1624.
Richins, M., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its
measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 303316.
Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meece, J. L. (2008). Motivation in education theory,
research, and applications (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc.
Shah, H., & Marks, N. (2004). A well-being manifesto for a flourishing society. Retrieved
March 25, 2005, from London: New Economics Foundation:
http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/z_sys_publicationdetail.aspx?pid=193
Sirgy, M. J. (1998). Materialism and quality of life. Social Indicators research, 43(3), 227260.
Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004
The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

13

Smyth, M. L., & Davis, J. R. (2004). Perceptions of dishonesty among two-year college
students: Academic versus business situations. Journal of Business Ethics, 51(1), 63-73.
Songsriwittaya, A., Koul, R., & Kongsuwan, S. (2010). Achievement goal orientation and
differences in self-reported copying behavior across academic programmes. Journal of
Further and Higher Education, 34(3), 419-430.
Sukrung, K. (2003). Making the grade. Retrieved November 15, 2007, from Bangkok Post:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/education/site2003/ftmy2703.htm
Trank, C. Q., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Who moved our cheese? Reclaiming professionalism in
business education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2(2), 189-205.
Van Yperen, N. W., Hamstra, M. R. W., & Van der Klauw, M. (2011). To win, or not to
loose, at any cost: The impact of achievement goals on cheating. British Journal of
Management, 22, S5-S15.
Visalo, P. P. (2008). When Buddhist monks cheat in exams. Retrieved September 15, 2011,
from Bangkok Post: http://www.buddhistchannel.tv/index.php?id=70,6289,0,0,1,0
Weber, M. (1958). Science as a vocation. Science and the Modern World View, 87(1), 111134.
Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Social competence at school: Relation between social responsibility
and academic achievement. Review of Educational Research, 61(1), 1-24.
Whitley, B. E., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (2002). Academic dishonesty: An educator's guide.
Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Proceedings- Behavioral Science and Social Problems-004

The 4th International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences
April 21st , 2012 Faculty of Liberal Arts, Prince of Songkla University

14