Journal of Academic Ethics最新文献_第7页

Detection of GPT-4 Generated Text in Higher Education: Combining Academic Judgement and Software to Identify Generative AI Tool Misuse 高等教育中GPT-4生成文本的检测:结合学术判断和软件识别生成AI工具误用

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-10-31 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09492-6

Mike Perkins, Jasper Roe, Darius Postma, James McGaughran, Don Hickerson

引用次数: 8

HEXACO Personality Traits and Self-Control as Predictors of Counterproductive Academic Behavior HEXACO人格特质与自我控制作为反生产学习行为的预测因子

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-10-31 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09493-5

Jisoo Ock, Gwang Yeong Heo, Minji Kweon

引用次数: 0

In Memoriam Denis Collins and Patrick O’Neill 纪念丹尼斯·柯林斯和帕特里克·奥尼尔

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-10-25 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09490-8

Loreta Tauginiene

引用次数: 0

Iranian Applied Linguists (mis) Conceptions of Ethical Issues in Research: A Mixed-Methods study 伊朗应用语言学家对研究中伦理问题的概念：混合方法研究

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-08-17 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09489-1

Mohamad Reza Farangi, Mohamad Khojastemehr

引用次数: 0

What are the Perspectives of Day and Evening Nursing Education Students About Cheating? 日间和晚间护理教育学生对作弊有何看法？

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-08-12 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09488-2

Fatma BAŞALAN İZ, R. Aslankoç, Günferah Şahi̇n

引用次数: 0

How Common is Cheating in Online Exams and did it Increase During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review 在线考试作弊有多普遍，在COVID-19大流行期间是否有所增加?系统回顾

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-08-04 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09485-5

Philip M. Newton, Keioni Essex

{"title":"How Common is Cheating in Online Exams and did it Increase During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review","authors":"Philip M. Newton, Keioni Essex","doi":"10.1007/s10805-023-09485-5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09485-5","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Academic misconduct is a threat to the validity and reliability of online examinations, and media reports suggest that misconduct spiked dramatically in higher education during the emergency shift to online exams caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reviewed survey research to determine how common it is for university students to admit cheating in online exams, and how and why they do it. We also assessed whether these self-reports of cheating increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with an evaluation of the quality of the research evidence which addressed these questions. 25 samples were identified from 19 Studies, including 4672 participants, going back to 2012. Online exam cheating was self-reported by a substantial minority (44.7%) of students in total. Pre-COVID this was 29.9%, but during COVID cheating jumped to 54.7%, although these samples were more heterogenous. Individual cheating was more common than group cheating, and the most common reason students reported for cheating was simply that there was an opportunity to do so. Remote proctoring appeared to reduce the occurrence of cheating, although data were limited. However there were a number of methodological features which reduce confidence in the accuracy of all these findings. Most samples were collected using designs which makes it likely that online exam cheating is under-reported, for example using convenience sampling, a modest sample size and insufficient information to calculate response rate. No studies considered whether samples were representative of their population. Future approaches to online exams should consider how the basic validity of examinations can be maintained, considering the substantial numbers of students who appear to be willing to admit engaging in misconduct. Future research on academic misconduct would benefit from using large representative samples, guaranteeing participants anonymity.","PeriodicalId":45961,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Ethics","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136085152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

How Common is Cheating in Online Exams and did it Increase During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review 在线考试作弊有多普遍，在COVID-19大流行期间是否有所增加?系统回顾

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-08-04 DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2187710/v1

P. Newton, Keioni Essex

{"title":"How Common is Cheating in Online Exams and did it Increase During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Systematic Review","authors":"P. Newton, Keioni Essex","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-2187710/v1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2187710/v1","url":null,"abstract":"Academic misconduct is a threat to the validity and reliability of online examinations, and media reports suggest that misconduct spiked dramatically in higher education during the emergency shift to online exams caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reviewed survey research to determine how common it is for university students to admit cheating in online exams, and how and why they do it. We also assessed whether these self-reports of cheating increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, along with an evaluation of the quality of the research evidence which addressed these questions. 25 samples were identified from 19 Studies, including 4672 participants, going back to 2012. Online exam cheating was self-reported by a substantial minority (44.7%) of students in total. Pre-COVID this was 29.9%, but during COVID cheating jumped to 54.7%, although these samples were more heterogenous. Individual cheating was more common than group cheating, and the most common reason students reported for cheating was simply that there was an opportunity to do so. Remote proctoring appeared to reduce the occurrence of cheating, although data were limited. However there were a number of methodological features which reduce confidence in the accuracy of all these findings. Most samples were collected using designs which makes it likely that online exam cheating is under-reported, for example using convenience sampling, a modest sample size and insufficient information to calculate response rate. No studies considered whether samples were representative of their population. Future approaches to online exams should consider how the basic validity of examinations can be maintained, considering the substantial numbers of students who appear to be willing to admit engaging in misconduct. Future research on academic misconduct would benefit from using large representative samples, guaranteeing participants anonymity.","PeriodicalId":45961,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Ethics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48929944","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Academic Dishonesty Within Higher Education in Nepal: An Examination of Students’ Exam Cheating 尼泊尔高等教育中的学术不诚实:对学生考试作弊的考察

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09486-4

Som Nath Ghimire, Upaj Bhattarai, Raj Kumar Baral

引用次数: 0

Perceived Research Misconduct Among the Pharmacy Academics and Students: A Cross-Sectional Survey Study in Malaysia 药学学者和学生对科研不端行为的认知——马来西亚的一项横断面调查研究

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-08 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09487-3

Wan Ping Ng, Khong Yun Pang, Pei Boon Ooi, C. Phan

引用次数: 0

Ethics Incognito: Detecting Ethically Relevant Courses Across Curricula in Higher Education 隐姓埋名的伦理学：在高等教育课程中发现与伦理学相关的课程

IF 1.8

Journal of Academic Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI: 10.1007/s10805-023-09482-8

Martino Ongis, David Kidd, Jess Miner

引用次数: 0