Theories of Plagiarism and Their Implications for Detecting Plagiarism in the Context of Higher Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20372/star.v13i1.R2Keywords:
plagiarism, detection, implication, theory, Academic DishonestyAbstract
Concern about academic dishonesty is on the rise among students at all levels of education. Plagiarism has been much reduced in academic settings. Nonetheless, technological progress is causing its rate to increase. As a result, progress in one country and overall knowledge are impeded. Consequently, we should look for methods to identify instances of plagiarism in academic settings. When it comes to finding instances of plagiarism, theories of plagiarism are crucial. Because they lay the theoretical foundations for knowing what plagiarism is, how to spot cases of academic dishonesty, and how to avoid and discourage it, they are crucial for finding it at universities. In this paper, we reviewed various theories and their implications for detecting plagiarism, including social desirability theory, rational choice theory, cognitive theory, cultural theory, social learning theory, strain theory, and differential association theory. Colleges and universities can maintain a climate of academic honesty and fairness by incorporating them into course offerings and policymaking. So, this article can be used by universities, businesses, consultants, educators, and students to reduce instances of plagiarism.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Carroll, J. (2007). A Handbook for Deterring Plagiarism in Higher Education. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Jeffrey, T., Chelsea, N. B. (2015). Social Learning Theory and Crime. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition), p. 409-414. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.45066-X.
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Hergenhahn, B. R., & Olson, M. H. (2017). An introduction to theories of learning. London: Routledge.
Hirschi, T. (2004). Self-control and crime. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-Regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp. 537-552). Guilford Press.
Klein, D. (2011). Why Learners Choose Plagiarism: A Review Of Literature. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, 97-110. Retrieved from http://www.informingscience.org/Publications/1385?Source=%2FJournals%2FIJELL%2 F Aricles%3FVolume%3D7-2011.
Loughran, T. A., Paternoster, R., Chaflin, A., & Wilson, T. (2016). Can the rational choice be considered a general theory of crime? Evidence from individual‐level panel data. Criminology, 54(1), 86-112. 10.1111/1745-9125.12097
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.
Pratt, T. C., Cullen, F. T., Blevins, K. R., Daigle, L. E., & Madensen, T. D. (2006). The empirical status of Gottfredson and Hirschi's general theory of crime: A meta-analysis. Criminology, 44(3), 841-877.
Ray, J V., Baker, T., & Caudy, M. S. (2020). Revisiting the generality of rational choice theory: Evidence for general patterns but differential effects across varying levels of psychopathy, Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 66(C). DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2019.101654.
Renzetti, C., M. (2008). Criminal Behavior Theories of Differentiation Association. Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, & Conflict (Second Edition).
Singhal, A., Cody, M., Rogers, E., & Sabido, M. (2004). Entertainment-education and social change: History research and practice. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate Publishers.
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2017). Plagiarism in higher education: Tackling tough issues in academic integrity. London: Routledge.
Weber-Wulff, D. (2019). False Feathers: A Perspective on Academic Plagiarism. Beling: Springer.
Webster, R. L., & Harmon, H. (2002). Comparing Levels of Machiavellianism of Today's College Students with College Students of the 1960s'. Teaching Business Ethics, 6 (4), 435-445. DOI:10.1023/A:1021149204098
Woolfolk, A.E., Winne, P.H., Perry, N.E., Shapka, J. (2010). Educational Psychology (4th ed). Toronto: Pearson Canada.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 82-91. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1016.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of Science, Technology and Arts Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
STAR © 2023 Copyright; All rights reserved
Accepted 2024-03-29
Published 2024-03-30
