{"title":"高校数字化学术不诚信现象研究","authors":"Elizaveta Klopkova, A. Miklyaeva","doi":"10.21603/2782-4799-2022-1-3-155-160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article describes the phenomenology of academic dishonesty in offline and online learning. The authors developed a questionnaire to assess the occurrence of various types of cheating, students’ subjective attitude to academic dishonesty, and its context. The study involved 52 university students aged 18–25 (37 female respondents). The obtained data were subjected to statistical analysis using the G-criterion and the Fisher’s angular transformation. The content analysis consisted of questions that required an extended answer. In online environment, the most common form of academic dishonesty was cheating at exams and tests by copying a fellow student's digital work, imitating technical problems, googling for answers, and providing false references. Students treated online academic dishonesty as more acceptable than during face-to-face learning. The study proves that the phenomenology of online academic dishonesty is significantly different from its traditional variant and, therefore, requires more detailed research.","PeriodicalId":359429,"journal":{"name":"Virtual Communication and Social Networks","volume":"155 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Phenomenology of Digital Academic Dishonesty at University\",\"authors\":\"Elizaveta Klopkova, A. Miklyaeva\",\"doi\":\"10.21603/2782-4799-2022-1-3-155-160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article describes the phenomenology of academic dishonesty in offline and online learning. The authors developed a questionnaire to assess the occurrence of various types of cheating, students’ subjective attitude to academic dishonesty, and its context. The study involved 52 university students aged 18–25 (37 female respondents). The obtained data were subjected to statistical analysis using the G-criterion and the Fisher’s angular transformation. The content analysis consisted of questions that required an extended answer. In online environment, the most common form of academic dishonesty was cheating at exams and tests by copying a fellow student's digital work, imitating technical problems, googling for answers, and providing false references. Students treated online academic dishonesty as more acceptable than during face-to-face learning. The study proves that the phenomenology of online academic dishonesty is significantly different from its traditional variant and, therefore, requires more detailed research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":359429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Virtual Communication and Social Networks\",\"volume\":\"155 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Virtual Communication and Social Networks\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21603/2782-4799-2022-1-3-155-160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Virtual Communication and Social Networks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21603/2782-4799-2022-1-3-155-160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Phenomenology of Digital Academic Dishonesty at University
The article describes the phenomenology of academic dishonesty in offline and online learning. The authors developed a questionnaire to assess the occurrence of various types of cheating, students’ subjective attitude to academic dishonesty, and its context. The study involved 52 university students aged 18–25 (37 female respondents). The obtained data were subjected to statistical analysis using the G-criterion and the Fisher’s angular transformation. The content analysis consisted of questions that required an extended answer. In online environment, the most common form of academic dishonesty was cheating at exams and tests by copying a fellow student's digital work, imitating technical problems, googling for answers, and providing false references. Students treated online academic dishonesty as more acceptable than during face-to-face learning. The study proves that the phenomenology of online academic dishonesty is significantly different from its traditional variant and, therefore, requires more detailed research.