Why High Schoolers Cheat: Evidence from Interviews and Observations

• In Event: Development of Academic Cheating from Kindergarten to High School

Abstract

High schoolers face unique risks for cheating. Definitions and norms for academic cheating often differ from those in middle school, the academic stakes are higher, and cheating is widespread among their peers (Cizek, 2003; Gino et al., 2009; McCabe et al., 2012). Rates of cheating peak in high school, with about 90% of students cheating at least once (Davis et al., 1992; McCabe et al., 2012; Waltzer & Dahl, in press). These risk factors for cheating co-occur with major developments in values, identities, and social cognition during adolescence (Krettenauer et al., 2016; Nucci, 2019).

The ubiquity of cheating has led some scholars to conclude that youth do not care about academic honesty (Diekhoff et al., 1996; Haines et al., 1986; Sykes & Matza, 1957). We propose an alternative explanation: Students generally care about honesty, but sometimes cheat when they face uncertainty about what constitutes cheating, evaluate a particular act of cheating as acceptable, or decide to prioritize social or academic goals that they deem even more important than academic integrity in a specific situation (Arnett, 1999; Eccles et al., 1996; Waltzer & Dahl, 2021).

To understand why so many students cheat, two studies examined adolescents’ experiences and decisions surrounding academic cheating in high school.

Study 1 used structured interviews with high school students (N = 85, Mage = 16.38 years, 48% girls) to examine their typical experiences with cheating. Students described a recent time they had cheated, explained their reasons for their actions, evaluated their actions, and indicated whether they had believed they were cheating at the time. Reflecting the pervasiveness of cheating, all students (100%) described an event, and half described an event from the last month. Fifty-four percent of students said they had not recognized their acts as cheating at the time, and 69% did not think their actions were wrong. Reflecting the role of pressure in adolescent decision-making, most students referenced concerns with the feasibility of the assignment, inherent value of the assignment, and academic outcomes (e.g., grades, Table 1).

To learn more about the context in which students learn about academic integrity, and to corroborate the findings of Study 1, Study 2 combined naturalistic observations (N = 5 classes, ~30 students in each) and surveys (N = 33 students). In syllabi and verbal statements, teachers provided varying information about academic integrity (e.g., different definitions, few explanations of consequences). During the observed sessions, they used a range of measures to prevent cheating. Overall, cheating was pervasive (M = 5.00 observed cheating acts per session). Surveys prompted third-party judgments about events that were similar to those described in Study 1. Students in each class read six hypothetical vignettes and indicated whether they thought the act constituted cheating, and if so, how they would rate its severity. Some acts yielded substantial perceptual disagreements, and some were rated as somewhat mild cheating (Table 2).

The findings support the proposed account of how situation-specific perceptions, evaluations, and priorities can lead students to cheat even though they generally value academic integrity.

Authors

• Talia Waltzer, University of California - San Diego
  Presenting Author

• Aarushi U. Shah, University of California at Berkley

• Fiona C DeBernardi, Cornell University

• Audun Dahl, University of California - Santa Cruz