FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W96304297> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W96304297 startingPage "201" @default.
• W96304297 abstract "A questionnaire on academic dishonesty was administered to management majors at a public and a private, Catholic university. Students were asked their extent of participation in 16 dishonest academic practices, their ratings of the ethical levels of the practices, their ratings of the likelihood of reasons for participation in the practices, and their gender and grade point average (GPA). Though more emphasis was placed on ethics and values at the Catholic university, the two groups of students reported very similar levels of academic dishonesty. Possible reasons for the absence of a relationship between the type of school attended and students' behavior are discussed. The problem of unethical and dishonest behavior in the workplace has recently been emphasized by highly publicized scandals involving several large U. S. corporations. College and university faculty and administrators have been concerned about this type of behavior among students for several decades. Surveys of college and university students have shown that academic dishonesty, or cheating, occurs at alarmingly high rates on the nation's campuses. Furthermore, there is evidence that rates have tended to increase over time (Singhal, 1982; Sisson T Greene& Saxe, 1992; Meade, 1992; Brown & Abramson, 1999; Brown & Mclnerney, 2001). While the relationship between time and the reported level of dishonesty is not perfect, the general trend has been upward. Other factors such as different definitions of dishonesty and different questionnaires have contributed to the variation found in the level of academic dishonesty. Concern over dishonest behavior at our institutions of higher learning should extend beyond campus boundaries. Dishonesty on the campus is likely a result of students' ethics and values that they will take with them when they graduate and move into the workplace. Several studies have found correlations between unethical behavior in college and on the job. Sierles, Hendrickx, and Circle (1980) found students who cheated in academic classes in medical school were more likely to falsify patient records in a clinical setting. Hubert (1985) found a significant correlation between classroom dishonesty and unethical clinical behavior among nursing students. Sims (1993) found significant correlations between the number and severity of dishonest acts respondents engaged in as students and as employees. Though these studies do not establish a causal relationship between dishonesty in the classroom and on the job, Ferrell and Daniel (1995) argue that a student who does not respect ethical behavior in college cannot be expected to respect it in future personal and professional relationships. One of the factors affecting a person's moral decision-making process is the person's moral philosophy. Moral philosophy can be learned through formal education as well as from religion, family members, and social contacts (McAllister, Ferrell, & Ferrell, 2003, p. 140). Therefore, one possible solution to the problem of unethical behavior on the campus and in the workplace is to expose students to a higher level of ethical and moral education during their college careers. This study provides some evidence as to the effectiveness of this strategy among undergraduate management majors, who are future business leaders, by comparing the academic dishonesty of the management majors at a secular, public university and a private, Catholic university, the latter offering a more values-oriented education than the former. The results will be of value to faculty and administrators in management programs in evaluating whether adding more ethics and values oriented content to their programs is likely to bring about more ethical behavior among their students. Literature Review The results of an extensive search of several electronic data bases are presented in Table 1. The table shows the last name of the first author of the study, its year of publication, and whether a relationship was found between the independent and dependent variables. …" @default.
• W96304297 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W96304297 creator A5028029320 @default.
• W96304297 creator A5080867570 @default.
• W96304297 date "2005-06-01" @default.
• W96304297 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W96304297 title "A Investigation of Academic Dishonesty among Business Students at Public and Private United States Universities" @default.
• W96304297 hasPublicationYear "2005" @default.
• W96304297 type Work @default.
• W96304297 sameAs 96304297 @default.
• W96304297 citedByCount "25" @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972012 @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972013 @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972014 @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972015 @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972016 @default.
• W96304297 countsByYear W963042972020 @default.
• W96304297 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W96304297 hasAuthorship W96304297A5028029320 @default.
• W96304297 hasAuthorship W96304297A5080867570 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C2776603611 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C2778024590 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C2778585151 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C2779390046 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C509550671 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W96304297 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C15744967 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C2776603611 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C2778024590 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C2778585151 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C2779390046 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C509550671 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C71924100 @default.
• W96304297 hasConceptScore W96304297C77805123 @default.
• W96304297 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W96304297 hasLocation W963042971 @default.
• W96304297 hasOpenAccess W96304297 @default.
• W96304297 hasPrimaryLocation W963042971 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W1528634062 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W1541078726 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W166366549 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2002776013 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2019671121 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2030520415 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2044336811 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2050534189 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2078353412 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2142483966 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2153976890 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2314487709 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W234093008 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W2581215450 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W40560576 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W49246406 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W574159310 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W579060975 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W61429673 @default.
• W96304297 hasRelatedWork W405706672 @default.
• W96304297 hasVolume "22" @default.
• W96304297 isParatext "false" @default.
• W96304297 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W96304297 magId "96304297" @default.
• W96304297 workType "article" @default.