Honor week raises awareness of cheating

Students attending universities with honor code policies are far less likely to engage in cheating behavior than schools that lack policies, a university professor said Wednesday at the first event of Honor Council's Honor Week.

Don Forsyth, professor of leadership studies, addressed the reasons why people cheat, the consequences for their behaviors and outlined steps that can be taken by universities across the country to ebb cheating.

Forsyth identified several reasons for cheating, including the desire for higher grades, the need to atone for class time missed because of illness, the propensity for students to help a struggling classmate and simple ignorance as to what "cheating" actually includes.

He acknowledged that researchers have had trouble gauging how often people cheat because most studies rely on anonymous surveys. Since most people are not comfortable confessing that they cheat and often downplay the extent of their cheating, accurate information is difficult to obtain, he said.

"We know that people do cheat," said Forsyth, who is the Colonel Leo K. and Gaylee Thorsness Chair in Ethical Leadership from the Jepson School of Leadership Studies. "Sometimes it's personality, sometimes it's context. What we do know is that universities that have honor systems in place tend to have less cheating."

At schools that have an honor code, 58 percent of students cheat, Forsyth said. An honor code comprises un-proctored exams, the use of an honor pledge, a student court and a non-toleration clause, he said.

At schools that do not have an honor code, 82 percent of students cheat, he said.

Because of the pervasive nature of cheating, researchers have tried to discover whether certain personality traits predict cheating behavior, Forsyth said. One study found that those who engage in "risky behaviors," such as speeding, and those who are generally "unreliable," such as adulterers, are more likely to cheat than those who lack the traits, he said.

Forsyth conducted his own study of 100 college students in order to determine the extent that a situation would dictate whether or not a person cheats. He placed students in a room alone, instructed them to take a test, and left the answer key exposed on a table, before leaving the room himself, he said. Questions were intended to be exceedingly difficult, so that no student could possibly know the correct answers, and so that random selection of answers would not generate a high score, he said.

Thirty-seven percent of students cheated when they were isolated, he said.

In the section part of his study, Forsyth placed students in a room with another person, working for Forsyth, who discovered the answer key and then goaded the subject into cheating. Eighty-three percent of students cheated with another person in the room, suggesting that the temptation to cheat is far greater in certain social situations, Forsyth said.

"If you have strong moral principles but you have never been in a trying situation and the desire to cheat is strong, your moral principles may change," Forsyth said. "Principles aren't really principles unless they are put to the test."

While Forsyth acknowledged the positive impact that the honor code has had on Richmond, he also endorsed defining "cheating" more exhaustively and creating an environment where cheating isn't as enticing to students.

Forsyth's speech precedes events later in the week presented by the Honor Council.

"The purpose of Honor Week is to increase awareness about the Honor Code and the Honor System and to help educate the university community," said Lindsay Petty, chairwoman of Westhampton College Honor Council.

Other Honor Week events include a showing on Thursday of "School Ties," a 1992 film about a student accused of cheating, and a mock honor hearing on Friday performed by Honor Council members.

Contact reporter Jimmy Young at jimmy.young@richmond.edu