Volume 37, Issue 2 (Winter 2021)                   ... 2021, 37(2): 411-438 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shaghaghi M. Interactional Effects of Macro Scale Social Factors in the Plagiarism Phenomenon: a case of Iran. .... 2021; 37 (2) :411-438
URL: http://jipm.irandoc.ac.ir/article-1-4686-en.html
Faculty of Education and Psychology; Dept. of Information Science and Knowledge Studies; Shahid Beheshti University; Tehran, Iran;
Abstract:   (1203 Views)
Plagiarism happens in a structure, and “other individuals” are very important in its occurance, so it can’t be a mere psychological phenomenon and must be concieved as social one, because structures have undebatable effect on act’s shape. Thus, plagiarism should be analyzed with societal variables. But we can design several models for explanation of its occurrence and order of involved variables. In this research the aim is to demonstrate and explain how the involved societal variables of plagiarism are organized to play their role in this phenomenon. For this reason, the Structural Equation Modeling method was used. Three valid models (structural, paradigmatic, systemic) and seven documented variables were adopted for examination. Needed data were gathered by means of a validated questionnaire from 540 master and PhD students in 36 largest universities in Iran selected randomly by multi-stage clustering method and then systematic choosing in each cluster. The gathered data was analyzed by Partial Least Square algorithm in PLS soft (version 3.3.3.). Three hypotheses were examined: 1. Structural model can better explain the order of occurance of variables in this phenomenon than other ones. 2. Economically observed variables are more effective than other ones. 3. Research formalism is more important mediator than other ones. Findings showed that systemic model has better fit indices than others and first hypothesis was rejected. Considering this model, the order of occurance of involved variables could be such that governmental capitalism (rental economics, erosion of specialization, commodification of knowledge) and cultural depositories (traditional discourses and ideological science) as inputs lead to process such as research formalism (mechanical research and dominance of rhethoric in research), scholastic habitus (scientific oligarchy and isolated researchers) and uncritical education (educational view to research). This process eventually lead to outputs such as indifference (immoral trade-off) and bureaucratic university (static evaluation and weakness of control). Second hypothesis was approved, and findings showed that economic observed variables are more effective than others in plagiarism phenomenon. Third hypothesis also was rejected, and findings showed that “scholastic habitus” (scientific oligarchy and isolated researchers) are more important mediators than research formalism and uncritical education.
Full-Text [PDF 814 kb]   (520 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Ethics, Laws, and Regulations
Received: 2021/04/6 | Accepted: 2021/06/15 | Published: 2021/12/14

1. دو تویت، ماتیلدا و استفان دوتویت. 2001. لیزرل محاوره‎ای؛ راهنمای کاربران. ترجمۀ علی دلاور، حسن‎علی ویس‌کرمی و محمد زرین‎جویی‌. 1392. تهران: نشر ارسباران.
2. چوپانی، حیدر، سید علی سیادت، و سعید رجایی‌پور. 1399. عوامل سازمانی مرتبط با سوء رفتار پژوهشی با تأکید بر اخلاق حرفه‌ای در پژوهش. اخلاق در علوم و فناوری 15 (1): 71-78.
3. شقاقی، مهدی. 1395. طراحی مدل توسعۀ اخلاق اطلاعات میان دانشجویان ایران. رسالۀ دکتری، دانشگاه تهران.
4. شقاقی، مهدی. 1397. ساخت و اعتباریابی پرسشنامۀ سنجش عوامل ساختاری اثرگذار بر سرقت علمی دانشجویان. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازماندهی اطلاعات 29 (3): 7-29.
5. صالحی، لیلی، و معصومه قاسم‎‌زاده. 1397. کاربرد الگوی رفتار برنامه‌ریزی‌شده در پیش‎بینی عوامل مؤثر بر قصد سرقت علمی. توسعۀ آموزش در علوم پزشکی 11 (31): 41-50.
6. عابدینی، یاسمین. 1394. ارائۀ الگوی ساختاری از روابط اهداف پیشرفت، نگرش به سرقت علمی، و عملکرد تحصیلی در دانشجویان. مطالعات اندازه‌گیری و ارزشیابی آموزشی 5 (11): 143-160.
7. عمیدی، علی. 1393. نظریۀ نمونه‌گیری و کاربردهای آن (جلد اول). تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
8. فروند، ژولین. 1974. نظریه‌های مربوط به علوم انسانی. ترجمۀ علی محمد کاردان. 1393. چاپ ششم. تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی.
9. فی، برایان. 1996. پارادایم‌شناسی علوم انسانی. ترجمۀ مرتضی مردی‌ها. 1389. تهران: دانشگاه امام صادق، پژوهشکدۀ مطالعات راهبردی.
10. کُربین، جولیت، و اَنسلم استراوس. 1998. مبانی پژوهش کیفی: فنون و مراحل تولید نظریۀ زمینه‌ای. ترجمۀ ابراهیم افشار. 1390. تهران: نشر نی.
11. گرشاسپی فخر، سعید. 1390. ارتباط بین بیکاری و سرقت علمی در ایران. فصلنامۀ رفاه اجتماعی 11 (40): 401-423.
12. منصوری، علی. 1395. رئالیسم ساختاری. دانشنامۀ آنلاین پژوهه، وابسته به پژوهشگاه باقرالعلوم. بازیابی‌شده از: http://www.pajoohe.com/fa/index.php?Page=definition&UID=37766‌ (دسترسی در 20 فروردین 1400).
13. ناصری، احمد، و معصومه فتحی. 1397. بررسی عوامل موثر بر گرایش دانشجویان ارشد حسابداری به سرقت علمی. پژوهش‌های تجربی حسابداری 7 (4): 1-20.
14. نوری، ناصر، عباسعلی زارعی موینی، و رجب اسفندیاری. 1399. رابطه بین اعتقادات فرهنگی و مذهبی و برداشت از جدیت و شدت سرقت علمی بین دانشجویان تحصیلات تکمیلی رشته زبان انگلیسی در ایران. فصلنامۀ مطالعات زبان و ترجمه 53 (4): 197-224.
15. همتی علمدار، قربان، ستاره شجاعی، قاسم سلیمی، و محمدصادق ارجمندی. 1396. مقایسه رفتار سرقت علمی و عوامل مؤثر بر سرقت علمی در دانشجویان استعداد درخشان و سایر دانشجویان (مورد مطالعه: دانشگاه شیراز). نامۀ آموزش عالی 37: 61-77.
16. Anam, Fatima, Kenneth Khavwandiza Sunguh, Asad Abbas Abdul Mannan, and Samira Hosseini. 2020. Impact of pressure, self-efficacy, and self-competency on students' plagiarism in higher education. Journal of Accountability in Research 27 (1): 32-48. [DOI:10.1080/08989621.2019.1699070]
17. Babaii, E., & H. Nejadghanbar. 2017. Plagiarism among Iranian Graduate Students of Language Studies: Perspectives and Causes. Ethics and Behavior 27 (3): 240-258. [DOI:10.1080/10508422.2016.1138864]
18. Bokosmaty, S., J. Ehrich, J. Eady, M. J. & K. Bell. 2019. Anadian university students' gendered attitudes toward plagiarism. Journal of Further and Higher Education 43 (2): 276-290.
19. Dijkstra, T. K. & J. Henseler. 2015. Consistent Partial Least Squares Path Modeling. MIS Quarterly 39 (2): 297-316. [DOI:10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02]
20. Farahian, Majed, Farshad Parhamnia, & Farnaz Avarzamani. 2020. Plagiarism in theses: A nationwide concern from the perspective of university instructors. Cogent Social Sciences 6 (1) [published online]. [DOI:10.1080/23311886.2020.1751532]
21. Feather, N. T. & I. R. Mckee. 2014. Deservingness, liking relations, schadenfreude, and other discrete emotions in the context of the outcomes of plagiarism. Australian Journal of Psychology 66 (1): 18-27. [DOI:10.1111/ajpy.12030]
22. Floridi, L. 2008. A Defence of Structural Realism. Synthese 161 (2): 219-253. [DOI:10.1007/s11229-007-9163-z]
23. Geels, F. W., & R. Kemp. 2007. Dynamics in socio-technical systems: Typology of change processes and contrasting case studies. Technology in Society 29 (4): 441-455. [DOI:10.1016/j.techsoc.2007.08.009]
24. Hair, J. F. H., G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, & M. Sarstedt. 2017. A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd edition. Los Angeles: Sage.
25. Henseler, J., C. M. Ringle, & R. R. Sinkovics. 2009. The use of partial least squares path modelling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing 20 (1): 277-319. [DOI:10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014]
26. Hoyle, R. H. (ed.). 2012. Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
27. Hu, Guangwei, & Yunhua Shen. 2020. Chinese university teachers' perceptions and practices regarding plagiarism: knowledge, stance, and intertextual competence. Ethics and Behavior [published online]. [DOI:10.1080/10508422.2020.1776616]
28. Ives, B., & L. Giukin. 2019. Patterns and Predictors of Academic Dishonesty in Moldovan University Students. Journal of Academic Ethics 18 (1): 71-88. [DOI:10.1007/s10805-019-09347-z]
29. Kasler, Jonathan, Leehu Zysberg & Raya Gal. 2020. Culture, collectivism-individualism and college student plagiarism. Ethics and Behavior [published online]. [DOI:10.1080/10508422.2020.1812396]
30. Kell Tremayne, & Guy J. Curtis. 2021. Attitudes and understanding are only part of the story: selfcontrol, age and self-imposed pressure predict plagiarism over and above perceptions of seriousness and understanding. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 46 (2): 208-216. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2020.1764907]
31. Khathayut, P., C. Walker-Gleaves, & S. Humble. 2020. Using the theory of planned behaviour to understand Thai students' conceptions of plagiarism within their undergraduate programmes in higher education. Studies in Higher Education [published online]. [DOI:10.1080/03075079.2020.1750584]
32. Khemiss, M., L. Berrezouga, M. Ben Khelifa, T. Masmoudi, and H. Ben Saad. 2019. Understanding of plagiarism among North-African university hospital doctors (UHDs): a pilot study. Accountability in Research 26 (2): 65-84. [DOI:10.1080/08989621.2018.1561290]
33. Lin, Yang, & Kathleen D. Clark. 2021. Speech assignments and plagiarism in first year public speaking classes: an investigation of students' moral attributes in relation to their behavioral intention. Communication Quarterly 69 (1): 23-42. [DOI:10.1080/01463373.2020.1864429]
34. Pandoi, Deepika, Sanjaya Singh Gaur, & Anup Kumar Gupta. 2019. Role of virtues in the relationship between shame and tendency to plagiarise Study in the context of higher education. International Journal of Educational Management 33 (1): 66-85. [DOI:10.1108/IJEM-02-2018-0074]
35. Santoso, A., & F. R. Cahaya. 2019. Factors influencing plagiarism by accounting lecturers. Accounting Education 28 (4): 401-425. [DOI:10.1080/09639284.2018.1523736]
36. Shaghaghi, M. & M. R. Vasfi. 2019. An Investigation into the Underpinning Factors of Plagiarism among Universities in Iran. LIBRI 69 (3): 201-212. [DOI:10.1515/libri-2017-0100]
37. Tremayne, K. & G. J. Curtis. 2021. Attitudes and understanding are only part of the story: self-control, age and self-imposed pressure predict plagiarism over and above perceptions of seriousness and understanding. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education 46 (2): 208-219. [DOI:10.1080/02602938.2020.1764907]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2022 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian Journal of Information processing and Management

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb