IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/1430.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cheating in an Online Academic Exam: Mitigation through Multiplicity of Exam Versions?

Author

Listed:
  • Flip Klijn
  • Mehdi Mdaghri Alaoui
  • Marc Vorsatz

Abstract

We study academic integrity in a final exam of a compulsory course with 463 undergraduate students at a major Spanish university. The exam is an unproctored online multiple-choice exam without backtracking. A key characteristic is that for each type of problem, groups of students receive different versions. Since each version appears in both an earlier and later stage of the exam, we can exploit grade points and timestamps to study students' academic integrity. We observe a significant decrease in completion time in later rounds; however, surprisingly, there is no corresponding impact on average grade points. The precise number of different versions does not seem to have an effect on either variable. Our findings suggest that studies of potential cheating may have to pay attention to completion times apart from (or even instead of) grades.

Suggested Citation

  • Flip Klijn & Mehdi Mdaghri Alaoui & Marc Vorsatz, 2024. "Cheating in an Online Academic Exam: Mitigation through Multiplicity of Exam Versions?," Working Papers 1430, Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:1430
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://bse.eu/sites/default/files/working_paper_pdfs/1430.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hill, Andrew J. & LoPalo, Melissa, 2024. "The effects of online vs in-class testing in moderate-stakes college environments," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. Bilen, Eren & Matros, Alexander, 2021. "Online cheating amid COVID-19," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 196-211.
    3. Le Maux, Benoît & Necker, Sarah, 2023. "Honesty nudges: Effect varies with content but not with timing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 433-456.
    4. Kenneth G. Elzinga & Daniel Q. Harper, 2023. "In‐person versus online instruction: Evidence from principles of economics," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 90(1), pages 3-30, July.
    5. Klijn, Flip & Mdaghri Alaoui, Mehdi & Vorsatz, Marc, 2022. "Academic integrity in on-line exams: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kofoed, Michael S. & Gebhart, Lucas & Gilmore, Dallas & Moschitto, Ryan, 2021. "Zooming to Class?: Experimental Evidence on College Students' Online Learning during COVID-19," IZA Discussion Papers 14356, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Le Maux, Benoît & Necker, Sarah, 2023. "Honesty nudges: Effect varies with content but not with timing," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 433-456.
    3. Trung Thanh Nguyen & Manh Hung Do, 2022. "Female rural–urban migrants and online marketplaces in emerging economies: Evidence from Thailand and Vietnam," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 317-342, September.
    4. Corneliu C. Simuț & Laurențiu Petrila & Felix-Angel Popescu & Ionuț Mihai Oprea, 2021. "Challenges and Opportunities for Telecommuting in the School System: Building a Sustainable Online Education in the Context of the SARS-Cov-2 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Trung Thanh Nguyen & Manh Hung Do, 2022. "Female migrants and online market participation in rural Southeast Asia," TVSEP Working Papers wp-026, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute of Development and Agricultural Economics, Project TVSEP.
    6. Klijn, Flip & Mdaghri Alaoui, Mehdi & Vorsatz, Marc, 2022. "Academic integrity in on-line exams: Evidence from a randomized field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    7. Liu Xin Juan & Wu Yun Tao & Palanisamy K. Veloo & Mahadevan Supramaniam, 2022. "Using Extended TPB Models to Predict Dishonest Academic Behaviors of Undergraduates in a Chinese Public University," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, November.
    8. Jonathan A. Tillinghast & Dr. James W. Mjelde & Anna Yeritsyan, 2023. "COVID-19 and Grade Inflation: Analysis of Undergraduate GPAs During the Pandemic," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.
    9. Hoque, Nazmul & Basher, Syed Abul & A.K. Enamul, Haque, 2022. "Do Students Perform Better in Online Delivery of Education? Evidence from Bangladesh," MPRA Paper 112981, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Zehra Batu & Mikail Batu & Akan Yanık & Hülya Oğur & Simge Kavcar & Serhat Bolat, 2023. "Lifestyle Changes and COVID-19 Related Perceptions of Turkish Healthcare Workers," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Field Experiment; academic integrity; online exam;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:1430. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Bruno Guallar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bargses.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.