Previous studies suggest that beliefs, attitudes, experiences, cultural norms, personal values, and socioeconomic status shape perceptions of corruption. However, there is a lack of research exploring how undergraduates' demographic variables influence their views on corruption, creating a significant knowledge gap. To address this gap, this study examines how undergraduates' perceptions of corruption vary according to demographic variables, such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, and academic level. Following a positivist research philosophy, this quantitative study used a cross-sectional ex-post facto research design. A sample of 315 undergraduates, selected through a proportionate stratified random sampling technique, participated in a physical survey. Data were collected using the Demographic Variables and the Perception of Corruption Questionnaire (DVPCQ). Due to the absence of established instruments demonstrating strong psychometric properties in the specific context of this research, the DVPCQ was developed. Its face and content validity were confirmed by domain and psychometric experts, and its construct validity was assessed through exploratory factor analysis. The instrument was reliable, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.87. The study's hypotheses were tested at the 0.05 alpha level using independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). All statistical tests were performed using JASP software. The results revealed significant differences in perceptions of corruption based on age, gender, income level, academic level, and marital status of students. Specifically, younger, female, lower-income, lower academic and married students perceived corruption more favourably than older, male, higher-income, higher academic and single students. This finding implies that anticorruption campaigns should be customised to appeal to older, male, higher-income, higher academic and single students more inclined to perceive corruption unfavourably. Campaigns should focus on educating students about the negative consequences of corruption and promoting integrity and transparency. These recommendations would interest policymakers, educators, and researchers aiming to combat campus corruption.