Under pressure to achieve? the impact of type and style of task instructions on student cheating

Simple item page
buir.contributor.authorMichou, Aikaterina
dc.citation.epage18en_US
dc.citation.spage1en_US
dc.citation.volumeNumber10en_US
dc.contributor.authorPulfrey, C. J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVansteenkiste, M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMichou, Aikaterinaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-05T06:55:09Z
dc.date.available2020-02-05T06:55:09Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.departmentGraduate School of Educationen_US
dc.description.abstractCombining principles of Achievement Goal Theory, which maintains that performance goals play a key role in individuals’ likelihood of cheating, and Self-Determination Theory, which highlights the importance of autonomy support and autonomous motivation underlying achievement goals, we examined whether the combination of experimentally inducing a mastery-approach (relative to performance-approach) goal with an autonomy-supportive manner (instead of controlling) may attenuate cheating. In two experiments carried out with university students, one classroom based (N = 164) and one laboratory (N = 160), we manipulated the type of induced goal (performance- vs. mastery-approach) and style of introducing the goal (i.e., controlling vs. autonomy-supportive) by taking also into consideration participants’ values. We hypothesized that the least behaviorally observed cheating would occur in a context promoting mastery-approach goals in an autonomy-supportive way and among individuals low in self-enhancement value adherence. The dependent variables in both studies consisted of two set of exercises, both including questions that could only be solved by cheating. Results of Poisson regression analyses revealed that in both studies the least cheating in the first set of exercises occurred in the autonomy-supportive/mastery-approach condition, indicating that this induced goal complex has the greatest potential to restrain academic dishonesty in the short-term. Interaction effects with self-enhancement value adherence revealed that the cheating inhibitory effects of this induced goal complex was less effective for those who value power and achievement.en_US
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by Zeynep Aykut (zeynepay@bilkent.edu.tr) on 2020-02-05T06:55:09Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Under_pressure_to_achieve_the_impact_of_type_and_style_of_task_instructions_on_student_cheating.pdf: 1588934 bytes, checksum: 4639b4b0e7e29d439c21811e77b32f47 (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2020-02-05T06:55:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Under_pressure_to_achieve_the_impact_of_type_and_style_of_task_instructions_on_student_cheating.pdf: 1588934 bytes, checksum: 4639b4b0e7e29d439c21811e77b32f47 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019en
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01624en_US
dc.identifier.issn1664-1078
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11693/53075
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.publisherFrontiers Media S. A.en_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01624en_US
dc.source.titleFrontiers in Psychologyen_US
dc.subjectAchievement goal complexen_US
dc.subjectAutonomy-supporten_US
dc.subjectCheatingen_US
dc.subjectMastery-approach goalsen_US
dc.subjectSelf-enhancement valuesen_US
dc.titleUnder pressure to achieve? the impact of type and style of task instructions on student cheatingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Under_pressure_to_achieve_the_impact_of_type_and_style_of_task_instructions_on_student_cheating.pdf
Size:
1.52 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
View / Download
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Scholarly Publications - Educational Sciences