IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v26y2017i19-20p2845-2864.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Plagiarism in nursing education: an integrative review

Author

Listed:
  • Joan Lynch
  • Bronwyn Everett
  • Lucie M Ramjan
  • Renee Callins
  • Paul Glew
  • Yenna Salamonson

Abstract

Aims and objectives To identify the prevalence and antecedents of plagiarism within nursing education and approaches to prevention and management. Background There has been growing media attention highlighting the prevalence of plagiarism in universities, including the academic integrity of undergraduate nursing students. A breach of academic integrity among nursing students also raises further concern with the potential transfer of this dishonest behaviour to the clinical setting. Design Integrative review. Methods A systematic search of five electronic databases including CINAHL, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source, and ERIC was undertaken. Only primary studies related to plagiarism and nursing students (undergraduate or postgraduate) studying at a tertiary education institution or nursing faculty were included. Both qualitative and quantitative study designs were included. Results Twenty studies were included in this review with six key themes identified: (1) prevalence; (2) knowledge, understanding and attitudes; (3) types of plagiarism; (4) antecedents to plagiarism; (5) interventions to reduce or prevent plagiarism; and (6) the relationship between academic honesty and professional integrity. Plagiarism is common among university nursing students, with a difference in perception of this behaviour between students and academics. The review also highlighted the importance of distinguishing between inadvertent and deliberate plagiarism, with differing strategies suggested to address this behaviour. Nevertheless, interventions to reduce plagiarism have not been shown to be effective. Conclusions The current punitive approach to plagiarism within nursing faculties has not reduced its occurrence. There is a need to promote awareness, knowledge and provide students with the appropriate referencing skills, to reduce the significant amount of inadvertent plagiarism. Relevance to clinical practice The importance of promoting honesty and academic integrity in nursing education is highlighted. Cheating within the academic setting has been associated with dishonesty in the clinical setting, which highlights the importance of nurturing a culture of honesty and integrity at university.

Suggested Citation

  • Joan Lynch & Bronwyn Everett & Lucie M Ramjan & Renee Callins & Paul Glew & Yenna Salamonson, 2017. "Plagiarism in nursing education: an integrative review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(19-20), pages 2845-2864, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:2845-2864
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13629
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13629?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen F. Hard & James M. Conway & Antonia C. Moran, 2006. "Faculty and College Student Beliefs about the Frequency of Student Academic Misconduct," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(6), pages 1058-1080, November.
    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. Winrow, Brian, 2016. "Do perceptions of the utility of ethics affect academic cheating?," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Sandra Scott, 2017. "From Plagiarism‐Plagued to Plagiarism‐Proof: Using Anonymized Case Assignments in Intermediate Accounting," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 247-268, December.
    3. Levon R. Hayrapetyan, 2011. "Prevention And Detection Of Certain Types Of Plagiarism During Computerized Assessments," Business Education and Accreditation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 3(1), pages 113-120.
    4. Šprajc Polona & Urh Marko & Jerebic Janja & Jereb Eva & Trivan Dragan, 2017. "Reasons for Plagiarism in Higher Education," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 50(1), pages 33-45, February.
    5. Bujaki, Merridee & Lento, Camillo & Sayed, Naqi, 2019. "Utilizing professional accounting concepts to understand and respond to academic dishonesty in accounting programs," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 28-47.

    More about this item

    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:wly:jocnur:v:26:y:2017:i:19-20:p:2845-2864. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.