Deterring Cheating in Online Environments

被引:58
|
作者
Corrigan-Gibbs, Henry [1 ]
Gupta, Nakull [2 ]
Northcutt, Curtis [3 ]
Cutrell, Edward [2 ]
Thies, William [2 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Comp Sci, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Microsoft Res India, Bangalore 560001, Karnataka, India
[3] MIT, Dept Elect Engn & Comp Sci, Cambridge, MA 02139 USA
关键词
Cheating; honor code; massive open online course (MOOC); Mechanical Turk; honey pot; warning; crowdsourcing; ACADEMIC INTEGRITY; MECHANICAL TURK; DISHONESTY; HONESTY; DEPLETION; BEHAVIOR; OATH;
D O I
10.1145/2810239
中图分类号
TP3 [计算技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Many Internet services depend on the integrity of their users, even when these users have strong incentives to behave dishonestly. Drawing on experiments in two different online contexts, this study measures the prevalence of cheating and evaluates two different methods for deterring it. Our first experiment investigates cheating behavior in a pair of online exams spanning 632 students in India. Our second experiment examines dishonest behavior on Mechanical Turk through an online task with 2,378 total participants. Using direct measurements that are not dependent on self-reports, we detect significant rates of cheating in both environments. We confirm that honor codes despite frequent use in massive open online courses (MOOCs) lead to only a small and insignificant reduction in online cheating behaviors. To overcome these challenges, we propose a new intervention: a stern warning that spells out the potential consequences of cheating. We show that the warning leads to a significant (about twofold) reduction in cheating, consistent across experiments. We also characterize the demographic correlates of cheating on Mechanical Turk. Our findings advance the understanding of cheating in online environments, and suggest that replacing traditional honor codes with warnings could be a simple and effective way to deter cheating in online courses and online labor marketplaces.
引用
收藏
页数:23
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Pedestrians' perceptions of route environments in relation to deterring or facilitating walking
    Andersson, Dan
    Wahlgren, Lina
    Schantz, Peter
    FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2023, 10
  • [22] Contagion of Cheating Behaviors in Online Social Networks
    Woo, Jiyoung
    Kang, Sung Wook
    Kim, Huy Kang
    Park, Juyong
    IEEE ACCESS, 2018, 6 : 29098 - 29108
  • [23] A multimodal approach to mitigate cheating in online assessments
    Elhiny, Lamees
    Ye, Xinfeng
    Manoharan, Sathiamoorthy
    Speidel, Ulrich
    2023 IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TEACHING, ASSESSMENT AND LEARNING FOR ENGINEERING, TALE, 2023, : 170 - 173
  • [24] Online cheating amid COVID-19
    Bilen, Eren
    Matros, Alexander
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR & ORGANIZATION, 2021, 182 : 196 - 211
  • [25] The Ethical Significance of Cheating in Online Computer Games
    Kimppa, K. K.
    Bissett, A. K.
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION ETHICS, 2005, 4 : 31 - 38
  • [26] Student Perceptions of Cheating in Online and Traditional Classes
    Turner, Stephen W.
    Uludag, Suleyman
    2013 IEEE FRONTIERS IN EDUCATION CONFERENCE, 2013,
  • [27] The Role of Values in Academic Cheating at University Online
    Vlasenko, Anastasiia
    Shirokanova, Anna
    DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION AND GLOBAL SOCIETY, DTGS 2021, 2022, 1503 : 294 - 307
  • [28] A Robust Examination of Cheating on Unproctored Online Exams
    Fendler, Richard
    Beard, David
    Godbey, Jonathan
    ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF E-LEARNING, 2024, 22 (05): : 26 - 38
  • [29] Do Online Exams Facilitate Cheating? An Experiment Designed to Separate Possible Cheating from the Effect of the Online Test Taking Environment
    Fask A.
    Englander F.
    Wang Z.
    Journal of Academic Ethics, 2014, 12 (2) : 101 - 112
  • [30] Cheating in Online Games: A Social Network Perspective
    Blackburn, Jeremy
    Kourtellis, Nicolas
    Skvoretz, John
    Ripeanu, Matei
    Iamnitchi, Adriana
    ACM TRANSACTIONS ON INTERNET TECHNOLOGY, 2014, 13 (03)