Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WOMEN AND MEN REGARDING DECISIONS TO COMMIT TEST CHEATING

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Few studies investigating student cheating havereported statistical tests of difference regarding theeffects of variables across gender. Using scenario-basedsurvey data from 598 university students, this study examined differences between womenand men in mean levels and effects of explanatoryvariables on intentions to cheat on a college exam.Findings showed significant gender differences in mean scores on measures of low self-control, shame,perceived external sanctions, grades, and cheatingintentions. Regression analyses showed that the effectsof morals and grades were more pronounced in predicting women's cheating intentions, whereas men weremore affected by prior cheating and perceived pleasureof cheating. Analyses further showed that higher levelsof anticipated shame among women and less self-control among men accounted for most of the variationin cheating intentions between women and men.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl and J. Beckmann (eds.), Action-Control: From Cognition to Behavior, pp. 11-39. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making Processes50(2):179-211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akers, R. (1985). Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akers, R. (1990). Rational choice, deterrence and social learning theory in criminology: The path not taken. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology81(3): 653-676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akers, R. (1997). Criminological Theories: Introduction and Evaluation, 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alschuler, A., and Blimling, G. (1995). Curbing epidemic cheating through systemic change. College Teaching43(4):123-125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L., Chiricos, T., and Waldo, G. (1977). Formal and informal sanctions: A comparison of deterrent effects. Social Problems25(1): 103-114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachman, R., Paternoster, R., and Ward, S. (1992). The rationality of sexual offending: Testing a deterrence/ration al choice conception of sexual assault. Law and Society Review26(2): 343-372.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, L., and Ajzen, I. (1991). Predicting dishonest actions using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Research in Personality25(3): 285-301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, A., and Perkins, H. (1986). Problem drinking among college students: A review of recent research. Journal of American College Health35(1): 21-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, D. (1984). Legal and extralegal barriers to delinquency. Criminology22(3):403-419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime, Shame and Reintegration. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunn, D., Caudill, S., and Gropper, D. (1992). Crime in the classroom: An economic analysis of undergraduate student cheating behavior. Research in Economic Education23(2): 197-207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney-Lind, M. (1989). Girls' crime and woman' s place: Toward a feminist model of female delinquency. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Montreal, Canada.

  • Cornish, D. (1993). Theories of action in criminology: Learning theory and rational choice approaches. In R. Clarke and M. Felson (eds.), Routine Activity and Rational Choice, pp. 118-142. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornish, D., and Clarke, R. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornish, D., and Clarke, R. (1987). Understanding crime displacem ent: An application of rational choice theory. Criminology25(4): 933-959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K., and Chesney-Lind, M. (1988). Feminism and criminology. Justice Quarterly5(4): 497-538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, S., and Ludvigson, H. (1995). Additional data on academic dishonesty and a proposal for remediation. Teaching of Psychology22(2): 119-121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elis, L., and Simpson, S. (1995). Inform al sanction threats and corporate crime: Additive versus multiplicative models. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency32(4): 399-424.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskridge, C., and Ames, G. (1993). Attitudes about cheating and self-reported cheating behaviors of criminal justice majors and non-criminal justice majors: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice Education4(1): 147-162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finley, N., and Grasmick, H. (1985). Gender roles and social control. Sociological Spectrum5(3): 317-325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein, M., and Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklyn-Stokes, A., and Newstead, S. (1995). Undergraduate cheating: Who does what and why? Studies in Higher Education20(2): 159-172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, W., Roper, T., and Gonzalez, C. (1988). Analysis of cheating on academic assignments. Psychological Record38: 543-555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genereux, R., and McLeod, B. (1995). Circumstances surrounding cheating: A questionnaire study of college students. Research in Higher Education36(6): 687-704.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, J., and Giever, D. (1995). Self-control and its manifestations among university students: An empirical test of Gottfredson and Hirschi' s general theory. Justice Quarterly12(2): 231-255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottfredson, M., and Hirschi, T. (1990). A General Theory of Crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H., and Bursik, R. (1990). Conscience, significant others, and rational choice: Extending the deterrence model. Law and Society Review24(3): 837-861.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H., Blackwell, B., and Bursik, R. (1993a). Changes in the sex patterning of perceived threats of sanctions. Law and Society Review27(4): 679-705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H., Bursik, R., and Arneklev, B. (1993b). Reduction in drunk driving as a response to increased threats of shame, embarrassment, and legal sanctions. Criminology31(1): 41-67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmick, H., Tittle, C., Bursik, R., and Arneklev, B. (1993c). Testing the core implications of Gottfredson and Hirschi' s general theory of crime. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency30(1): 5-22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, D. (1989). Measures of illegal behavior in individual-level deterrence research. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency26(3): 253-275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, J., Simpson, J., and Gillis, A. (1979). The sexual stratification of social control. British Journal of Sociology30(1): 25-38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagan, J., Simpson, J., and Gillis, A. (1987). Class in the household: A power control theory of gender and delinquency. American Journal of Sociology92(4): 788-860.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hindelang, M., Hirschi, T., and Weis, J. (1981). Measuring Delinquency. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. (1988). Seductions of Crime. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, H. (1992). Self-reported reasons for why students drink. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education37(1): 14-28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S., and Nagin, D. (1989). Tax compliance and perceptions of the risks of detection and criminal prosecution. Law and Society Review23(2): 209-240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanza-Kaduce, L., and Klug, M. (1986). Learning to cheat: The interaction of moral development and social learning theories. Deviant Behavior7(3): 243-259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. (1992). Shame: The Exposed Self. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X., and Kaplan, H. (1996). Gender-related differences in circumstances surrounding initiation and escalation of alcohol and other substance use/abuse. Deviant Behavior17(1): 71-106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobel, T. (1993). Gender differences in adolescents' cheating behavior: An interactional model. Personality and Individual Differences14(2): 275-277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski, C., and Smith, C. (1985). Moral reasoning and moral conduct: An investigation prompted by Kohlberg' s theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology49(4): 1016-1027.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maramark, S., and Maline, M. (1993). Academic Dishonesty Among College Students. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D., and Bowers, W. (1994). Academic dishonesty among males in college: A thirty year perspective. Journal of College Student Development35(1): 5-10.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D., and Trevino, L. (1996). What we know about cheating in college: Longitudinal trends and recent developments. Change28(1): 28-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D., and Trevino, L. (1997). Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in Higher Education38(3): 379-396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaels, J., and Miethe, T. (1989). Applying theories of deviance to academic cheating. Social Science Quarterly70(4): 872-885.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S., and Simpson, S. (1991). Courtship violence and social control: Does gender matter? Law and Society Review25(2): 335-352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagin, D., and Paternoster, R. (1993). Enduring individual differences and rational choice theories of crime. Law and Society Review27(3): 467-496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novacek, J., Raskin, R., and Hogan, R. (1991). Why do adolescents use drugs? Age, sex, and user differences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence20(4): 475-492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paternoster, R., and Piquero, A. (1995). Reconceptualizing deterrence: An empirical test of personal and vicarious experiences. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency32(3): 251-286.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paternoster, R., and Simpson, S. (1996). Sanction threats and appeals to morality: Testing a rational choice model of corporate crime. Law and Society Review30(3): 549-573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piliavin, I., Gartner, C., and Matsueda, R. (1986). Crime, deterrence, and rational choice. American Sociological Review51(1): 101-119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, C., and McLaughlin, G. (1989). An analysis of predictors of college students' ethical inclinations. Research in Higher Education30(2): 195-219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, D., and Toombs, R. (1993). A scale to assess perceptions of cheating in examination-related situations. Educational and Psychological Measurement53(3): 755-762.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, D., and Olswang, S. (1981). Academic misconduct: The due process rights of students. NASPA Journal19(1): 12-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, S. (1989). Feminist theory, crime and justice. Criminology27(4): 605-632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. (1993). The relationship between academic dishonesty and unethical business practices. Journal of Education for Business69(2): 207-211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. (1979). Sex and deviance: An assessment of major sociological variables. Sociological Quarterly20(2): 183-195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D., and Paternoster, R. (1987). The gender gap in theories of deviance: Issues and evidence. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency24(1): 140-172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiller, S., and Crown, D. (1995). Changes over time in academic dishonesty at the collegiate level. Psychological Reports76(4): 763-768.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, G., and Stevens, F. (1987).Ethical inclinations of tomorrow' s managers revisited: How and why students cheat? Journal of Education for Business63(1): 24-29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tibbetts, S. (1997). Gender differences in students' rational decisions to cheat. Deviant Behavior18(4): 393-414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tibbetts, S., and Herz, D. (1996). Gender differences in factors of social control and rational choice. Deviant Behavior17(2): 183-208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tittle, C., and Rowe, D. (1973). Moral appeal, sanction threat, and deviance: An experimental test. Social Problems20(4): 488-497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, K., and Hawkins, R. (1989). The meaning of arrest for wife assault. Criminology27(1): 163-181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, J., and Herrnstein, R. (1985). Crime and Human Nature. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Stephen G. Tibbetts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tibbetts, S.G. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WOMEN AND MEN REGARDING DECISIONS TO COMMIT TEST CHEATING. Research in Higher Education 40, 323–342 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018751100990

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018751100990

Keywords

Search

Navigation