Abstract

Academic dishonesty has been and continues to be a major problem in America’s schools and universities. Such dishonesty is especially important in high schools, where grades earned directly impact the academic careers of students for many years to come. The rising pressure to get the best grades in school, get into the best college, and land the best paying job is a cycle that has made academic dishonesty increase exponentially. Thus, finding the widespread roots of cheating is more important now than ever. In this study, we focus on how societal norms and interactions with peers influence lying about scores in order to obtain a benefit in a high school population. We show that (1) the societal norms that go hand in hand with test-taking in school, as administered by a teacher, significantly dampen small-scale dishonesty, perhaps suggesting that environment-specific rewards offsets cheating; (2) providing reminders of societal norms via pre-reported average scores leads to more truthful self-reporting of honesty; (3) the difficulty of the class a person is in is correlated with score on a test that requires no particular knowledge or skill taught in that class; (4) males seem to cheat more than females; and (5) teenagers are more dishonest earlier in the day. We suggest that students understand that cheating is wrong, an idea backed up by the literature, and that an environment which clearly does not condone dishonesty helps dampen widespread cheating in certain instances. This dampening effect seems to be dependent on the reward that students thought they would get for exaggerating their performance.

Highlights

  • Cheating is a complex and often contradictory phenomenon. It is well-established that humans choose cooperative options in many realistic scenarios, with cooperation or “playing fair” often shaped by social heuristics [1,2,3]

  • The differing significance in regression models leads us to believe that some cheating did occur

  • As we noted in the results, the distribution of scores in the control was very different from the experimental conditions, which leads us to believe that some people did cheat, just not enough to make a noticeable difference in our relatively small sample size

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cheating is a complex and often contradictory phenomenon. It is well-established that humans choose cooperative options in many realistic scenarios, with cooperation or “playing fair” often shaped by social heuristics [1,2,3]. Cheating in specific situations is still seen to be highly prevalent [4]. This is perhaps most evident in high schools, where grades earned are thought to pave the path to students’ futures.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call