Perspectives of Teachers and Students on the Reasons Behind Students’ Engagement in Cheating on Exams: A Delphi Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Education Development Center, Sirjan School of Medical Sciences

2 Department of Public Health, Sirjan School of Medical Sciences, Sirjan, Iran

3 Neuroscience Research Center, Institute of Neuropharmacology, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

10.30476/jhmi.2025.106963.1284

Abstract

Introduction: Academic misconduct specifically cheating is much debated in literature.
Cheating on exams undermines educational integrity and student development. The purpose
of this study was to explore the perspectives of teachers and students on the underlying
reasons behind students’ engagement in cheating on exams.
Methods: This study employed a qualitative Delphi technique and four rounds of Delphi were
conducted with 42 participants to narrow down the reasons behind students’ engagement in
cheating on exams at Sirjan School of Medical Sciences in 2024. Participants were selected
through purposive sampling, and included students (n=30), and teachers (n=12). To collect
data, an electronic questionnaire was developed and distributed in Delphi rounds over a
period of five weeks. Thematic analysis using the six steps proposed by Braun and Clarke
was employed to identify and analyze key themes and concepts. Data analysis was performed
using MAXQDA-10 software. The ten most significant reasons were systematically ranked
using a 5-point Likert scale.
Results: Among students, 60.0% were male (n=18) and 40.0% were female (n=12). In contrast,
the teacher group consisted of 66.7% males (n=8) and 33.3% females (n=4). Students had
a mean age of 22.73±1.12 years and teachers averaged 36.50±2.10 years. Findings revealed
a consensus between teachers and students, though their prioritization of these factors
differed. The most significant factors identified by both groups were “fear of failure”, “lack
of student engagement”, “lack of formative assessment”, “lack of knowledge”, “exam anxiety”,
“unmonitored environment”, “exam room layout”, “competition among peers”, “normalizing
cheating”, and “lack of perseverance”.
Conclusion: The identified factors are critically important to be taken into consideration
to avert academic misconduct by university students. Therefore, there is a need to orient
students on the consequences of academic misconduct in a dual effort between university
officials and teachers to promote academic integrity.

Highlights

Amin Beigzadeh (Google Scholar)

Ali Reza Yusefi (Google Scholar)

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Desalegn AA, Berhan A. Cheating on examinations and its predictors among undergraduate students at Hawassa University College of Medicine and Health Science, Hawassa, Ethiopia. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14:89. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-14-89.
2. Saeidi M, Noori M, Jajarmi Khayyat H, Ashraf Azimi M, Bolourian M, Mirzaei M. Examining effective factors, inhibitory factors and the most common methods of cheating in students: A systematic review. Medical Education Bulletin. 2022;3(1):407-16.
3. Bazoukis G, Dimoliatis I. Cheating in medical schools in Greece: Quantitative evaluation and recommendations for resolving the problem. Arch Hell Med. 2011;28(3):390-9.
4. McCabe DL, Treviño LK, Butterfield KD. Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics & Behavior. 2001;11(3):219-32.
5. Bernardi RA, Banzhoff CA, Martino AM, Savasta KJ. Challenges to academic integrity: Identifying the factors associated with the cheating chain. Accounting Education. 2012;21(3):247-63.
6. Moradi V, Saidijam M. A Study of identifying the cheating trend in exams of medical students of Hamedan University of Medical Sciences. Medicine and Spiritual Cultivation. 2001;40(1):16-19.
7. Run-xian Z, Xiao-pin Z. On the Cause of University Students’ Cheating Phenomenon from the Perspective of Albert Bandura’s Reciprocal Determinism. Online submission. 2007;4(5):7-10.
8. Glick SM. Cheating at medical school. BMJ. 2001;322(7281):250-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7281.250.
9. Nonis S, Swift CO. An examination of the relationship between academic dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Journal of Education for Business. 2001;77(2):69-77.
10. Ormond JL. Soft Skills in Higher Education and Graduate Employability: A Delphi Study: Sam Houston State University; 2023.
11. Hsu CC, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. 2007;12(1):10.
12. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology. 2006;3(2):77-101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
13. Ifeagwazi CM, Chukwuorji JC, Egbodo SO, Nwoke MB. Peer pressure, fear of failure and examination cheating behavior in the university: Does gender make the difference? Cognition, Brain, Behavior. 2019;23(1).
14. Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris AH. School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research. 2004;74(1):59-109.
15. Deci EL, Ryan RM. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry. 2000;11(4):227-68.
16. Beigzadeh A, Yamani N, Sharifpoor E, Bahadinbeigy K, Adibi P. Teaching and learning in clinical rounds: a qualitative meta-analysis. Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma. 2021;7(1):46-55. doi: 10.34172/jept.2020.32.
17. Salajegheh M, Bahmanbijari B, Shokouhi M, Safipour Afshar A, Beigzadeh A. Educational Environment Assessment at Outpatient Clinics in Teaching Hospitals of Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Iran, from Resident’s Perspective Based on the ACLEEM Questionnaire. Strides in Development of Medical Education. 2015;12(Supplement):119-30.
18. Beigzadeh A, Haghani F. Active Learning Methods: A Way of Tackling Large Classroom Setting. Strides in Development and Medical Education. 206;13(1):107-13.
19. Esmaeili M, Haghdoost AA, Beigzadeh A, Bahmanbijari B, Bazrafshan A. Personal and scientific characteristics of positive and negative role models among medical educators from the viewpoint of dentistry and pharmacy students in Kerman University of Medical Sciences Iran. Strides in Development of Medical Education. 2013;10(3):298-311.
20. LEILA V, Shokohi M, Beigzadeh A. Characteristics of a capable university teacher; the viewpoints of faculty members of health services management department in Iranian medical universities. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2014;14(2):90-100.
21. Irons A, Elkington S. Enhancing learning through formative assessment and feedback: Routledge; 2021.
22. KoĀ T. Formative Assessment in Higher Education: From Theory to Practice. European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research Articles. 2023;10(4):79-89.
23. Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Review of Educational Re-search, 77 (1): 81-112. 2007.
24. McCabe DL, Butterfield KD, Trevino LK. Cheating in college: Why students do it and what educators can do about it. Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. 2012.
25. Scheers N, Dayton CM. Improved estimation of academic cheating behavior using the randomized response technique. Research in Higher Education. 1987;26(1):61-9.
26. Klein HA, Levenburg NM, McKendall M, Mothersell W. Cheating during the college years: How do business school students compare? Journal of business ethics. 2007;72(2):197-206.
27. Pulfrey CJ, Vansteenkiste M, Michou A. Under Pressure to Achieve? The Impact of Type and Style of Task Instructions on Student Cheating. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1624. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01624.
28. Beigzadeh A, Bazyar H, Delzendeh M, Razmi MH, Sharifi N. Comparing the effect of lecture method and cooperative teaching method on the learning, communication skills, and attitudes of students: a quasi-experimental study. Frontiers in Education. 2024;9:1449538.
29. Eshet Y, Steinberger P, Grinautsky K. Relationship between statistics anxiety and academic dishonesty: A comparison between learning environments in social sciences. Sustainability. 2021;13(3):1564.
30. Arora S, Chaudhary P, Singh RK. Impact of coronavirus and online exam anxiety on self-efficacy: the moderating role of coping strategy. Interactive Technology and Smart Education. 2021;18(3):475-92.
31. McCabe DL, Trevino LK. Academic dishonesty: Honor codes and other contextual influences. The journal of higher education. 1993;64(5):522-38.
32. Pomales-Garcia C, Carlo HJ, Ramos-Ortiz TM, Figueroa-Santiago IM, Garcia-Ortiz S. Non-traditional exam seat arrangements. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2009;57(1):188-95.
33. Miller AD, Murdock TB, Grotewiel MM. Addressing academic dishonesty among the highest achievers. Theory Into Practice. 2017;56(2):121-8.
34. Teodorescu D, Andrei T. Faculty and peer influences on academic integrity: College cheating in Romania. Higher Education. 2009;57(3):267-82.
35. Muhney KA, Gutmann ME, Schneiderman E, DeWald JP, McCann A, Campbell PR. The prevalence of academic dishonesty in Texas dental hygiene programs. J Dent Educ. 2008;72(11):1247-60.
36. McCabe DL, Trevino LK. Individual and contextual influences on academic dishonesty: A multicampus investigation. Research in higher education. 1997;38(3):379-96.
37. Baldwin DC, Jr., Daugherty SR, Rowley BD, Schwarz MD. Cheating in medical school: a survey of second-year students at 31 schools. Acad Med. 1996;71(3):267-73. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199603000-00020.
38. Tolkin I., Glick S. Ethical behavioral standards of medical students on examinations and studies. Harefıtah. 2007;146(6):429-34, 502.
39. Kusnoor AV, Falik R. Cheating in medical school: the unacknowledged ailment. South Med J. 2013;106(8):479-83. doi: 10.1097/SMJ.0b013e3182a14388.
40. Matthews D. Book review: mindset: the new psychology of success, by Dweck, CS (2006). Gifted Children. 2007;1(2):7.
Health Management & Information Science
Volume 12, Issue 3
July 2025
Pages 171-184

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics