הונאה דיגיטלית ואנלוגית באקדמיה: תפוצה, מניעים ועונשים

This study examined the phenomenon of academic dishonesty among
university students. It was based on Pavela's (1997) framework of academic
dishonesty types (cheating, plagiarism, fabrication and facilitation) and
distinguished between digital and "traditional- analog" dishonesty. The study
focused on the analysis of academic dishonesty cases committed by students,
the reasons for academic dishonest behaviors, and the severity of penalties
for violations of academic integrity. The motivational framework for
conducting academic dishonesty (Murdock & Anderman, 2006) and the SelfConcept Maintenance model (Mazar, Amir, & Ariely, 2008) were employed
for analyzing the reasons for dishonest behaviors. We analyzed 315 protocols
of the Disciplinary Committee, at The Open University of Israel, from the
period 2012-2013 that present cases of academic dishonesty committed by
OUI students. The findings showed that the analog dishonesty was more
common than the digital one. According to the students, the most common
reason for conducting academic dishonesty was the ability to maintain a
positive view of self as an honest person despite violating ethical codes.
Penalties for analog dishonesty were found to be more severe than those
imposed for digital dishonesty. Interestingly, women were penalized more
severely than men, despite no significant gender differences in dishonesty
types or in any other parameter explored in the study. Findings of this study
shed light on the scope and roots of academic dishonesty and may assist
institutes in coping effectively with this phenomenon.