Use multi-method, methodologically rigorous measurement when studying achievement goals and academic dishonesty¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 6 claims (6 for) · 1 study (1 quant-synthesis), q3 · 1 of 1 report an effect size · 6 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The authors' forward-looking recommendation is that future research on achievement goals and academic dishonesty improve measurement rigor and combine methods. They state: "we call for more methodological rigor in the measurement of goals and dishonesty as well as multi-methods approaches when investigating their interplay." This follows from their finding that measure type moderated performance-goal associations and that most studies relied on self-reports. The strategy applies to researchers designing studies of cheating, not to classroom instruction directly.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Studies should measure goals and dishonesty with validated, reliability-checked instruments and combine self-report, behavioral, and intention measures

Constraints¶

• Behavioral measures were rare in the existing literature (seven effect sizes), so multi-method designs require new data collection rather than reuse of typical survey data

Target Learners¶

• students in secondary and tertiary education
• educators in academic institutions

Target Learning Goals¶

• understanding and preventing academic dishonesty
• motivational regulation of achievement behavior

Claims¶

• Most research on achievement goals and academic dishonesty relies on correlational designs, self-report dishonesty measures, and personal goal measures [+W]
• Academic dishonesty measure type moderates performance goal associations: behavioral and intention measures reveal positive links that self-reports mask [+W]
• Educational level moderates the mastery-approach–dishonesty association, with no correlation in elementary samples [+W]
• Mastery-avoidance goals show no significant association with academic dishonesty [+W]
• Mastery goals are negatively associated with academic dishonesty across studies [+W]
• No evidence of publication bias was found in the achievement goal–dishonesty literature [+W]

Related Strategies¶

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Tanja Fritz, Hernán González Cruz, Stefan Janke, Martin Daumiller. (2023). Elucidating the Associations Between Achievement Goals and Academic Dishonesty: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09753-1