Few cross-national studies have been conducted on academic dishonesty. The aim of this study was to explore students’ disclosed levels of academic dishonesty between New Zealand and Nigeria. The measures obtained included incidence, acceptability, and justification of dishonest action. It was hypothesized that there would be differences between the two groups and that differences could be explained in terms of deontology, cultural relativism, utilitarianism, rational fair exchange, and/or response bias. There were 844 medical and health science students who participated in (...) the study and completed a questionnaire that explored incidence, acceptability, and justification of dishonest action. A binary logistic regression revealed that age and incidence were significant predictors of country allocation. Nigerian students reported more engagement in dishonest behaviors, and it is argued that these students have diverse cultural expectations, language variances, response strategies, norms, beliefs, and values. Educational interventions are essential to address concerns related to academic dishonesty such as promoting cross-cultural discourse, providing study skills programs, utilizing peer mentoring, creating formal exchange strategies, and endorsing honor codes. (shrink)

Understanding and measuring levels of academic integrity within higher education institutions across the world is an important area of study in the era of educational internationalization. Developing a cross-cultural measure will undoubtedly assist in creating standardization processes and add to the discourse on cross-cultural understanding on what constitutes honest and dishonest action in the higher education context. This study has used a combination of exploratory and confirmatory factor analytical procedures to validate a previously published questionnaire, namely the cross-cultural academic integrity (...) questionnaire. Inspection of response distributions was also undertaken. Primary participants in this study were from Iran, and secondary reference participants were from New Zealand and Nigeria. The findings indicate that a revised questionnaire better represents the data obtained from all three regions. Three CCAIQ-2 domains are proposed: cheating, collusion and complying. However, the response distributions indicated differences among the three groups, further suggesting that the theoretical constructs developed through factors analysis may not represent equivalence in terms of cross-cultural understanding. This research will inevitably create international debate on the measurement of integrity and how this measurement process can be used to establish internationally recognized and accountable educational regulations. (shrink)