Specialist degree in school psychology, Eastern Illinois University, 1995. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 29-33).

Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2004. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 141-157). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2004. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 141-157). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Lehigh University, 2005. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 169-173).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2006. / Title from title screen (site viewed May 9, 2007). PDF text:x, 199 p. : ill.(some col.) ; 3.37Mb UMI publication number: AAT 3236909. Includes bibliographical references. Also available in microfilm and microfiche formats.

The subject of this study was academic cheating among college students. Academic cheating has been described as both epidemic and endemic. It is considered a significant problem because it is occurring on all college campuses with high frequency and because it undermines the foundation of the college as a learning institution. A review of the literature on cheating behaviors revealed percentages of self-reported cheating ranging from 23.7% to 98%.The present study explored the relationship between academic dishonesty and student backgrounds, along with student attitudes. A replication of the research previously done by Melody Graham, Jennifer Monday, Kimberly O'Brien, and Stacey Steffen, (1994) was conducted at Indiana Institute of Technology (IIT). The faculty and the students were included in the research study. Three main areas explored in the present study concerned the relationship of student background variables, perceptual differences between faculty and students, and faculty background variables to attitudes of cheating. More lenient attitudes toward cheating were found with the variables of race, religiosity, coming from urban areas, living in dorms or college apartments, majoring in business, and playing sports.The findings of the present study indicated that 94.81% of the student respondents had engaged in one of the seventeen cheating behaviors that were identified in the Graham et al. study. However, these seventeen cheating behaviors included some acts that were less serious than others. Also, it should be noted that many students engage is such behaviors infrequently. The seventeen behaviors along with an explanation of the tabulations for the 94.81% statistic, were included on pages 221-222 of the study. The severity rating of each behavior was listed in Table 7, page 134.A Synthesis Model of Cheating Decision Making was developed as an implication of the research conducted for the present study. This Model can assist faculty in understanding the cheating decision process of students. Also, students can use the Model to facilitate a self evaluation of their decisions. / Department of Educational Leadership

This paper provides logit estimates of the probability that students will cheat in a specific class using randomized response and direct question data in two logit models. The results predict that there are several indicators of the probability of cheating occurring in a class. These factors include both student and instructor characteristics. They suggest several steps that can be taken to reduce the incidence of cheating which are relatively inexpensive yet potentially very successful. Further, this study explores the usefulness of the randomized response survey technique in obtaining information about sensitive behavior. Estimates indicate that there are steps that instructors can take to reduce the amount of cheating that takes place in their classes. This study suggests that using multiple versions of each exam, non-multiple choice exams and reducing the weight of each exam score toward the final course grade are all measures which will lower the incidence of academic dishonesty in a class. By allowing a respondent more anonymity the randomized response method encourages more truthful answers than direct questioning. In both models studied here, randomized response yields higher estimates of cheating. The randomized response estimates also appear to be more consistent with previous estimates of cheating than do the direct question estimates. This lends confidence to the conclusion that when surveying respondents about potentially sensitive or threatening information the direct question method yields inaccurate predictions of actual behavior and randomized response is a more appropriate methodology. / Graduation date: 1994

Thesis (M. S.)--Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008. / Committee Chair: Smith, Anderson; Committee Member: Hertzog, Christopher; Committee Member: Rogers, Wendy.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 261-272).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, June, 2009. / Title from PDF t.p. Includes bibliographical references.