The Dynamic of Cheating: Descriptive Study of Intention to Cheat

Cheating is strongly related to other unethical behaviors. It happens everywhere, including in universities. College students, ideally, should be prevented from cheating to minimize the potential of conducting unethical behaviors in the future. To design effective intervention, examining the cause of cheating is absolutely necessary. Cheating, like any other behavior, can be predicted by knowing its intention and the components of intention using the Theory of Planned Behavior. The present study explained the intention to cheat while studying in university along with its determinants and beliefs. The present study obtained data using online questionnaire based on the Theory of Planned Behavior to 233 participants. Regression analysis was performed to describe the significance level of each determinant and belief. The result showed that the determinant which had significant influence toward intention to cheat was attitude toward behavior (p = 0.00; β = 0.769; t = 15.620). The most significant belief in that determinant was “cheating during learning in university can help one earning good grade without studying hard”. Therefore, present study can be used as a basis to design interventions to reduce intention to cheat in university students.

1993; Thompson, 2000). Unethical behavior conducted in the workplace was mostly caused by one's attitude toward their surroundings that is already built by the previous behaviors (Sims, 1993). This correlation happens because of the belief that underlies the behavior (Lawson, 2004).
When cheating is already perceived as an acceptable behavior, other unethical behaviors tend to be perceived in similar manner as well.
Ironically, cheating occurs frequently in universities. Approximately, this behavior was conducted by large percentage of university students (Klien, Levenburg, McKendall & Mothersell, 2007;Mccabe, Butterfield & Trevino, 2006;Rokovski & Levy, 2007). This phenomenon RESWARA also occurs in Indonesia. Cheating, whether during an examination or assignment, is conducted by nearly all accounting students (Rizaludin, 2014) and economy students (Friyatmi, 2011). Various ways are done for cheating, from exchanging answer, asking peers, using notes, to using cell phones (Friyatmi, 2011). Therefore, we need to examine this behavior thoroughly in order to be able prevent it. Then, it was found that intentions are the most approximate antecedents of behaviors (Fishbein, 1967). It means that by comprehending the intention and its determinant, we are likely able to explain and predict behavior. Of course there will be another behavior that precedes behavior, that is actual behavior control (ABC) (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). ABC consists of more complex behavior and explains the variety of behaviors less than intention.
Therefore, examining intention to perform behavior was needed to understand behaviors, what preceded it, and how to modify it.
The Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) has been recognized as having a great theoretical power, especially in describing the process of forming an intention to do certain action (Ajzen, 2015). TPB is preceded by Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) (Ajzen, 1985(Ajzen, , 1991. TRA emphasizes on the causal antecedents of intentions to perform behaviors over which people have sufficient control (Ajzen, 2005). So, there is already a determinant that explains the inner factor (attitude toward behavior) and the social factor (perceived norm). Perceived behavior control (PBC) was added to this construct as a determinant in forming an intention in TPB. PBC was added because it can explain the process of perceived obstacle and supportive factor to conduct a behavior (Ajzen, 1991 2016). Therefore, the present study was conducted to complete previous study (Simkin & Mcleod, 2010) and to clarify the role of each dimension and belief to intention of cheating in university.

Variable identification
There were 4 variables analyzed in this study. First was intention. Intention stood as a different variable than its components.
This condition would affect the analysis and the conclusion of how intention was formed (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010), it would be explained further in instrument subsection.
Intention stood as the most proximate antecedent toward behavior and it was formed by the other variables attitude toward behavior, perceived norm, and perceived behavior control.
Second is attitude toward behavior.
Attitude is a latent disposition or tendency to respond with some degree of favorableness toward a psychological object (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). In this research, psychological object meant "cheating during learning in this university". Attitude is based on belief. Belief is subjective probability that an object has a certain attribute (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010), which means that it is related to cheating attribute, whether it could result in good grade or allow one to not study for test and so on.
Third is perceived norm. Perceived norm is defined as individual's perception that people who are important to they think they should (or should not) perform a particular behavior (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). Perceived norm is based on normative belief, which is a belief that a particular reverent individual or group that thinks whether a certain action should be done or not.
Fourth is perceived behavior control.
Perceived behavioral control is defined as the extent in which people believe that they are capable of performing a given behavior, that they have control over its performance (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010). Perceived behavior control is based on control belief, a belief about resources and opportunities individuals think they possess and obstacles or impediments to performing the behavior.
The sample was obtained through two stages cluster random sampling (Nazir, 1998 (Nazir, 1988 First, researcher conducted an elicitation. Elicitation is a process to identify salient belief that underlies determinants (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010;Francis et al., 2004).
The belief that is obtained through elicitation is used to construct the inventory.
In attitude toward cheating, the most frequent beliefs were "can answer (examination) without learning", "can obtain a good grade", "feeling guilty", "unable to understand the subject", and "do not need to work hard". In perceived norm, the most frequent significant others were "lecturer", "parents", and "friends". In perceived behavior control, the most frequent beliefs were "the lecturer is strict", "running out of time", "the essayform is difficult to cheat on", and "did not prepare (study) well".

Method of analysis
Researcher used regression analysis in present study. The analysis was based on TPB framework (Figure 1). Besides the analysis above, researcher also analyzed the variables based on demographic characteristics. Researcher analyzed differences across gender, batch, and GPA.

Discussion
Intention is the most powerful determinant in predicting whether one will perform any behavior or not (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010).
Another factor that contributes to performance of any behavior is actual behavior control. This factor is the real condition in the real life that could not be predicted because of its complexity.
Therefore, actual behavior, intention plays a significant role in predicting behaviors, including about cheating during studying in university.
Intention is determined by three variables, which are attitude, perceived norm, and perceived control. However, there is no need for three determinants to have a significant contribution toward intention (Fishbein & Ajzen, 2010).
According to the current study, only attitude toward cheating that had a significant contribution toward intention.  & Ajzen, 2010). Therefore, whether the student would have a high or low intention to cheat in university was significantly determined by their tendency to respond with some degree of favorableness to cheat.
The perception or behavior of their significant people toward cheating and the perceived control toward performing