Skip to content

Academic Dishonesty and the Diamond Fraud - Attitudes of UAE Undergraduate Business Students during the COVID-19 Pandemic

MetadataDetails
Publication Date2022-10-30
JournalInternational Journal of Learning Teaching and Educational Research
AuthorsOmar Al Serhan, Roudaina Houjeir, Mariam Aldhaheri
InstitutionsHigher Colleges of Technology
Citations7
AnalysisFull AI Review Included

This study investigates the drivers of academic dishonesty among UAE undergraduate business students during the COVID-19 pandemic, utilizing the Fraud Diamond Theory (Pressure, Rationalization, Opportunity, and Capability) as the analytical framework.

  • Core Objective: To statistically determine the correlation between the four elements of the Fraud Diamond and the propensity of business students to cheat.
  • Sample & Context: A quantitative survey (N=305) was conducted among business undergraduates in the UAE during the shift to online learning (Aug-Nov 2020).
  • Pressure Factors (H1): Pressure was found to be significantly and positively correlated with cheating propensity. Key drivers include peer attitudes favoring cheating and the pressure felt by sponsored students to maintain high grades.
  • Rationalization (H2): Rationalization factors (justifying unethical behavior) showed a significant positive effect on cheating, confirming that students cheat when they can convince themselves their actions are acceptable.
  • Opportunity & Capability (H3 & H4): Both perceived opportunity (system weaknesses) and capability (tech-savviness, trust in new technological methods to cheat) were positively correlated with a higher propensity for academic dishonesty.
  • Conclusion: All four elements of the Fraud Diamond significantly predict the incidence of cheating, highlighting the need for comprehensive administrative and technological interventions.

The following table summarizes the key quantitative parameters and statistical results derived from the study’s data analysis.

ParameterValueUnitContext
Sample Size (N)305StudentsTotal participants surveyed
Data Collection PeriodAug 2020 - Nov 2020N/ADuration of survey deployment
Questionnaire Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha)0.76 to 0.88N/AConsistency measure for survey instrument
Sampling Adequacy (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin)0.86N/AGood value for factor analysis
H1 Significance (Peer Attitudes)0.008p-valueSignificant positive effect on cheating propensity
H1 Significance (Sponsored Student Status)0.000p-valueHighly significant negative effect (1=Yes to 2=No) on cheating, implying pressure to justify sponsorship
H2 Significance (Rationalization Factor 1)0.001p-valueSignificant positive effect of rationalization on cheating
H3 Significance (Opportunity Score)0.001p-valueSignificant positive correlation with cheating propensity
H4 Significance (Trust in Tech to Cheat)0.026p-valueSignificant positive correlation with cheating propensity (Capability factor)
Ordinal Regression Model Fit (H0: Parallel Lines)0.52 to 0.76p-valueAssumption holds for all tested models

The research employed a quantitative design focused on statistical inference to test the hypotheses derived from the Fraud Diamond Theory.

  1. Research Design: Quantitative study utilizing a survey questionnaire to investigate attitudes and reported incidences of academic dishonesty.
  2. Sampling Technique: Random sampling was used to recruit undergraduate business students from two major higher education institutions in the UAE.
  3. Data Collection: Data was collected via a standardized survey questionnaire designed to capture the key variables: propensity to cheat (dependent variable), motivation/pressure, rationalization, perceived opportunity, and capability.
  4. Dimensionality Reduction: Factor analysis was applied to complex variable sets (e.g., Non-shareable pressure, Rationalization) to extract underlying factors (e.g., RATA_FAC1, RATA_FAC2), explaining up to 73% of the total variance.
  5. Hypothesis Testing Model: The Ordinal Logistic Regression model was the primary statistical tool used to test the hypotheses, treating the propensity to cheat (Never, Rarely, Frequently) as an ordered categorical dependent variable.
  6. Control Variables: Gender and current GPA were included in the regression models as control variables.
  7. Univariate Analysis: Preliminary analysis utilized Chi-square tests (for categorical variables) and one-way ANOVA tests (for continuous variables) to identify initial associations with cheating propensity.

The findings of this study, while focused on educational integrity, have direct implications for institutional policy, technology adoption, and risk management, particularly in high-stakes professional fields like business and finance.

  • Institutional Risk Management: Developing robust frameworks to manage the reputational and quality risks associated with high rates of academic fraud in business programs.
  • Educational Technology (EdTech) Investment: Prioritizing investment in advanced anti-cheating technologies:
    • Lockdown browsers and screen-sharing monitoring systems for online exams.
    • Plagiarism detection software (e.g., TurnItIn) to counter rationalization and opportunity factors.
  • Policy and Enforcement Systems: Implementation of standardized, zero-tolerance academic dishonesty codes across departments to reduce perceived opportunity and increase deterrents.
  • Curriculum Integrity: Designing and delivering ethics courses that directly address the rationalization factors identified (e.g., justifying cheating due to pressure or unfair situations).
  • Proctoring Standardization: Establishing standardized rules and aggressive proctoring methods (including student ID verification) for all high-stakes assessments to minimize opportunity.
View Original Abstract

This paper examines academic dishonesty by business undergraduate students in the United Arab Emirates, using the lens of the fraud diamond theory, during the Covid-19 pandemic. The study used a survey of 305 students from the college of business in a major public university in the UAE, from August 2020 to November 2020 to investigate the extent of academic dishonesty. Results revealed H1 (p<0.001; p-value=0.73), H2 (p<0.001; p-value=0.52), H3 (p<0.001; p-value=0.76), and H4 (p<0.001; p-value=0.53) resulting in acceptance of all the hypotheses. The findings indicate that pressure to maintain a scholarship status and having achieved a previous academic award are positively and significantly related to the likelihood of committing academic dishonesty. Furthermore, the rationalization factors of the fraud diamond theory are significantly and positively related to the reported incidences of academic dishonesty. Similarly, the opportunity and capability factors of the fraud diamond theory significantly predict the incidence of cheating. As a result, the study recommends that administrators should implement academic dishonesty codes, reduce the opportunity to cheat, invest in new technology for reducing cheat.