Veríssimo Ana Cristina, Barbosa Joselina, Severo Milton, Matos Paula Mena, Oliveira Pedro, Ribeiro Laura
Department of Public Health and Forensic Sciences and Medical Education, Medical Education Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Med Educ Online. 2025 Dec;30(1):2506739. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2025.2506739. Epub 2025 May 23.
Multiple instruments have been used to assess academic misconduct, yet robust psychometric evidence has been reported only for a few. This study aims to determine the validity and dimensionality of a novel Academic Misconduct Questionnaire (AMQ) and to explore differences between students who engage in distinct misbehaviours. A diverse sample of health and non-health students replied to the AMQ. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted using two subsamples. Predictive models were computed for the AMQ and its dimensions. The questionnaire showed good validity and reliability, revealing eight dimensions related to Cheating during (two forms) and prior Exams, Plagiarism, Fraud in Academic Work, Impersonation (assessment), Signature Forgery in attendance sheets and Not Reporting peer misconduct. The predictors of student engagement in each form of misconduct differed, except for perceiving greater peer fraud, which increased the propensity for all misbehaviours. Perceiving higher sanctions reduced the propensity to engage in most forms, while gender played a role in half of them. First-year students were more likely to Not Reporting peer misconduct and less likely to disclose Fraud in Academic Work and Signature Forgery than those in more advanced years. Health students scored higher in most misbehaviours, especially compared to Economics/Law, Social Sciences and Arts/Humanities, while the latter two disclosed higher Signature Forgery. This study proposes a valid instrument to assess academic misconduct in university students. The predictive models helped to better understand differences between students who engaged in distinct misbehaviours, enabling more targeted interventions.
已有多种工具用于评估学术不端行为，但只有少数工具报告了可靠的心理测量学证据。本研究旨在确定一种新型学术不端行为问卷（AMQ）的有效性和维度，并探讨参与不同不当行为的学生之间的差异。来自健康和非健康专业的学生样本对AMQ进行了回答。使用两个子样本进行了探索性和验证性因素分析。计算了AMQ及其维度的预测模型。该问卷显示出良好的有效性和可靠性，揭示了与考试期间作弊（两种形式）、考前作弊、抄袭、学术工作欺诈、冒名顶替（评估）、在考勤表上伪造签名以及不举报同伴不当行为相关的八个维度。除了察觉到同伴欺诈行为较多会增加所有不当行为的倾向外，学生参与每种不当行为的预测因素各不相同。察觉到更高的制裁会降低参与大多数不当行为的倾向，而性别在其中一半的行为中起作用。与高年级学生相比，一年级学生更有可能不举报同伴不当行为，而举报学术工作欺诈和伪造签名的可能性较小。健康专业的学生在大多数不当行为上得分更高，尤其是与经济学/法律、社会科学以及艺术/人文专业的学生相比，而后两个专业的学生伪造签名的比例更高。本研究提出了一种有效的工具来评估大学生的学术不端行为。预测模型有助于更好地理解参与不同不当行为的学生之间的差异，从而实现更有针对性的干预。
