ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Faculty versus students: different perceptions of misconducts at university.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Academic integrity is a goal to be achieved by university institutions, and student academic behavioral misconduct is a phenomenon to be fought and eradicated. Two of the main problems faced by universities in this area are: (1) the lack of consensus among students and faculty on the seriousness of acts considered academic misconduct; and (2) the difficulty of noticing and controlling certain student behaviors. The main aim of this paper is to assess the importance of these two problems. Methods: For this purpose, the authors compare, on the one hand, students' and teachers' perceptions of the seriousness of different types of dishonest and inappropriate behaviors and, on the other hand, the frequency with which they report that these misconducts occur. Two samples were taken from the responses of students and teachers of the Economics and Business School of the University of Zaragoza. The first consisted of 333 students and the second of 72 teachers. The academic misconducts asked about were grouped into three categories: academic works, exams, and interpersonal relationships in the classroom. Nonparametric tests were used to study the significance of the differences observed in the responses of students and teachers. Results: Results show that the greatest differences in the assessment of the seriousness of academic misconducts are in the group referring to interpersonal relationships. In terms of frequency, the study reveals that there is a serious problem of moral hazard in some of the behaviors analyzed, since the frequency with which teachers notice these practices is lower than that expressed by students. Discussion: Based on these results, possible measures to be adopted in universities in order to eradicate the academic misconduct problem are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.