Research

Plagiarism Deterred Through Information, Not Threats

Giving students a Web-based tutorial on plagiarism is more effective in deterring the behavior than threatening students with detection and punishment. That's according to the results of an experiment conducted by professors at the University of Michigan and Swarthmore College and published as a working paper by the National Bureau of Economic Research.

The study, "Rational Ignorance in Education: A Field Experiment in Student Plagiarism," found that incidents of plagiarism could be reduced by as much as 65 percent when students participated in a "15-minute Web-based tutorial that [taught them] what constitutes plagiarism and how to avoid it," according to information released by the University of Michigan. The experiment was conducted by Brian Jacob, Walter H. Annenberg Professor of Education Policy in the University of Michigan Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and Thomas Dee, associate professor of economics and director of the public policy program in Swarthmore College's Department of Economics.

The experiment, which took place back in fall 2007, involved 1,200 papers written (or not) by 537 social-science and humanities undergraduates at a "selective post-secondary institution." Students in half of the courses involved in the study were required to participate in the plagiarism awareness tutorial via their Blackboard accounts, which included 18 pages of information about plagiarism followed by a quiz on the topic. It also provided advice about writing, including avoiding procrastination and taking careful notes. None of the students were made aware that they were participating in a study.

Among the control group, 3.3 percent of papers met the researchers' criteria for plagiarism (using Turnitin), while the frequency of plagiarism for the Web tutorial group was about 1.3 percent. The Web tutorials, according to the researchers, were especially effective with one high-risk group in particular: those who had lower SAT scores coming into their institution. Using the data gathered in this study, the researchers predicted a "plagiarism rate of 17.7 percent among students at the national mean of SAT scores (i.e., 1017) and 31.4 percent among students at the 25th percentile of SAT scores (i.e., 850)."

Further, following the experiment, researchers conducted surveys with the students. "A follow-up survey of participating students suggests that the intervention reduced plagiarism by increasing student knowledge rather than by increasing the perceived probabilities of detection and punishment," according to the researchers. "These results are consistent with a model of student behavior in which the decision to plagiarize reflects both a poor understanding of academic integrity and the perception that the probabilities of detection and severe punishment are low."

Further information about the study is available here.

Comments

Wed, Mar 17, 2010 ELIAS SIMUTOWE

This is good material

Mon, Feb 8, 2010

Yes, the tutorial can be seen here: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bajacob/files/Other%20Education/anonymized_tutorial.zip

Fri, Feb 5, 2010

Also in regards to the IRB comment -- researchers are allowed to use student data if their names are not used and the information is held in aggregate. Secondly, deception is also allowable, especially in a study such as this. If the students and instructors knew prior to the event what was being studied, the study itself might manipulate the participants behaviors. However -- after the study is completed, the researcher is required to inform the participants of the deception that was used.

Fri, Feb 5, 2010 Michael McClennen Miami, FL

In reply to the first comment, this is a very good example of why I believe that IRBs have gone way overboard. There is a lot of data that simply cannot be gained when everyone is fully informed about what they are participating in. Unless there is concrete evidence that someone was actually harmed by the study, I don't believe that anything unethical has occurred.

Wed, Feb 3, 2010

The authors must have access to a very generous & forgiving Institutional Review Board (IRB) to approve their human subjects protocol. The study appears to violate some basic ethical principles, particularly deception of both students & instructors, as well as FERPA in the use of confidential student information (SAT scores, grades etc).

Wed, Feb 3, 2010 Adam Lipkin

David, according to the Bates page, the CC license is a "share-alike" one, meaning that if the Michigan folks made changes based on it, they have to license it using the CC as well.

Tue, Feb 2, 2010 Editor

If you would like to request a copy of the tutorial used in this study, please contact Brian Jacob through the University of Michigan (http://www.fordschool.umich.edu/faculty/Brian_Jacob). Please also remember that neither he nor co-author Thomas Dee is affiliated with Campus Technology. Therefore, some explanation of why you're writing and which piece of research you're referring to and which tutorial you would like to access would be useful. Do not e-mail me requesting a copy of any materials. I do not have the right to redistribute them. --David Nagel

Tue, Feb 2, 2010 Editor

I would suggest contacting one or more of the authors for the tutorial. The material is available from them by request. Links to their contact information are at the beginning of this article. The tutorial, incidentally, was "adapted for Blackboard from resources available at the Plagiarism Resource Site (https://ats.bates.edu/cbb/) developed by staff at Colby, Bates and Bowdoin Colleges," according to the researchers. It's available under a Creative Commons license. I don't know the copyright status of the adapted version the researchers used. --David Nagel

Tue, Feb 2, 2010

Where is the video?

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above