BMJ 2001;322:274-275 ( 3 February )

Papers

Are "tomorrow's doctors" honest? Questionnaire study exploring medical students' attitudes and reported behaviour on academic misconduct

Editorial by Glick and Letters p 296

S C Rennie, final year medical studentJ R Crosby, curriculum facilitator

Dundee University Medical School, Curriculum Office, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee DD1 9SY

Correspondence to: J R Crosby j.r.crosby{at}dundee.ac.uk

Honesty and integrity are key characteristics expected of a doctor, although academic misconduct among medical students is not new.1 A survey of 428 American students in 1980 found that 58% reported cheating during medical school.2 We assessed students' attitudes and behaviours on "cheating" and aimed to raise awareness of academic misconduct.


    Methods and results
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References

The survey was initiated, designed, and conducted by students. An anonymous questionnaire was distributed to 676 medical students in all years at Dundee medical school (only half of the fourth years were present at this time). The questionnaire was completed at the end of a lecture and collected by the main researcher (SCR). The questionnaire had 14 scenarios in which a fictitious student, "John," engaged in dishonest behaviour. Students were asked to give their gender, year, and views on informing faculty about misconduct and signing a written declaration.

For each scenario, students were asked whether they felt John was wrong and whether they had done or would consider doing the same. Responses were recorded "yes," "not sure," and "no" (students were not given the opportunity to distinguish between "have done" and "would consider doing"). Results were analysed with SPSS by using percentage frequency responses.

A total of 461 students (68%) completed the questionnaire. Most students' attitude was that most of the scenarios were wrong. The exceptions were resubmitting work from a previous degree, chatting to a student about an objective structured clinical examination that one student has completed and the other is about to do, lending work to other students to look at, and copying text directly and simply listing the source in a reference list.

The proportion of students reporting that they had engaged in or would consider engaging in the scenarios varied from 2% (95% confidence interval 1-3%) for copying answers in a degree examination to 56% (51-61%) for copying directly from published text and only listing it as a reference. About a third of students reported that they had engaged in or would consider engaging in the behaviour described in four of the scenarios: chatting about an objective structured clinical examination, writing "nervous system examination normal" when this hadn't been performed, lending work to others to look at, and copying text directly from published sources and simply listing the source in a reference list.


    Comment
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References

Students consider dishonest behaviour to be wrong and would not engage in it. However, that some students did report engaging in dishonest behaviour is seen as important and worrying. Fewer students consider it wrong to reference published text correctly compared with copying in exams, submitting a senior student's work, or copying another student's work. The responses for some of the scenarios involving plagiarism may indicate students' lack of understanding regarding referencing text appropriately and also a need for clear guidelines. Large proportions of students were also unsure whether exchanging information regarding an objective structured clinical examination was wrong. This may reflect confusion concerning the acceptability of swapping information and a lack of guidance given to students about appropriate behaviour.


                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 

Attitudes and behaviours of students on scenarios involving academic misconduct (yes=wrong for attitudinal response; have done or would consider doing for behaviour response)

Explaining to students what is acceptable behaviour is important when trying to reduce dishonesty. 3 4 Shifting the emphasis from assessment to the learning process may result in a decrease in fraud and plagiarism.1 Academic misconduct is contrary to the ideals of academic and professional integrity and devalues the system of course assessment. It needs to be taken seriously by medical schools as it casts doubt on the validity of qualifications.5

    Acknowledgments

We thank Professor D A Levison, dean of Dundee medical school, for supporting this study and proofreading our manuscripts; Professor I K Crombie, professor of epidemiology and public health, for his advice on the questionnaire design and statistical analysis of the results; Elizabeth Brown for her input into the questionnaire design; and the students of Dundee medical school for participating.

Contributors: SCR had the original idea and was the principal researcher, designing and distributing the questionnaire and doing the statistical analysis. JRC commented on the questionnaire and results. SCR and JRC designed the study, did the data entry and validation, and wrote the paper. JRC and SCR are the guarantors.

    Footnotes

Funding: None.

Competing interests: None declared.

The survey used in this study appears on the BMJ's website


    References
Top
Methods and results
Comment
References

1. Anderson RE, Obenshain SS. Cheating by students: findings, reflections, and remedies. Acad Med 1994; 69: 323-332[Medline].
2. Sierles F, Hendrickx I, Circle S. Cheating in medical school. J Med Educ 1980; 55: 124-125[Medline].
3. Baldwin Jr DC, Daugherty SR, Rowley BD, Schwarz MD. Cheating in medical school: a survey of second-year students at 31 schools. Acad Med 1996; 71: 267-273[Medline].
4. Wagner Jr RF. Medical student academic misconduct: implications of recent case law and possible institutional responses. Acad Med 1993; 68: 887-889[Medline].
5. Walker J. Students' plagiarism in universities: what are we doing about it? Higher Education Research and Development 1998; 17: 89-106.

(Accepted 18 September 2000)


© BMJ 2001

Related Articles

Medical students see that academic misconduct is common
Gunther Eysenbach
BMJ 2001 322: 1307. [Extract] [Full Text]

Cheating
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

Cheating
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

Students need to be taught about what constitutes academic misconduct
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text]

Cheating at medical school
Shimon M Glick
BMJ 2001 322: 250-251. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Cheating at medical school
S A Spencer, Belinda Brewer, Emile Tan, Chris O'Loughlin, William Westlake, J Vive, Neil Fergusson, Rod MacQueen, Michael Jarmulowicz, James Paton, Phillip Bennett-Richards, Anonymous, and Sharon Davies
BMJ 2001 322: 296. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Parks, R, Warren, P M, Boyd, K M, Cameron, H, Cumming, A, Lloyd-Jones, G (2006). The Objective Structured Clinical Examination and student collusion: marks do not tell the whole truth. J. Med. Ethics 32: 734-738 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Roff, S, Preece, P (2004). Helping medical students to find their moral compasses: ethics teaching for second and third year undergraduates. J. Med. Ethics 30: 487-489 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Council, M. S. (2004). Response from Dundee Medical Student Council to "media misinterpretation". J. Med. Ethics 30: 380-380 [Full text]  
  • Semple, M., Kenkre, J., Achilles, J. (2004). Student fraud: The need for clear regulations for dismissal or transfer from healthcare training programmes for students who are not of good character. Journal of Research in Nursing 9: 272-280 [Abstract]  
  • Rennie, S C, Rudland, J R (2003). Differences in medical students' attitudes to academic misconduct and reported behaviour across the years--a questionnaire study. J. Med. Ethics 29: 97-102 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Clements, C J, Ratzan, S (2003). Misled and confused? Telling the public about MMR vaccine safety. J. Med. Ethics 29: 22-26 [Abstract] [Full text]  
  • Jones, R. (2002). Research misconduct. Fam Pract 19: 123-124 [Full text]  
  • Eysenbach, G. (2001). Medical students see that academic misconduct is common. BMJ 322: 1307-1307 [Full text]  
  • Glick, S. M (2001). Cheating at medical school. BMJ 322: 250-251 [Full text]  
  • Vassiliou, V. (2001). Students sitting finals: ready to be house officers?. JRSM 94: 655-655 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Reasons not to lie
Greg Dubord
bmj.com, 2 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Gender and years of study - effects on attitudes?
Wai-Ching Leung
bmj.com, 3 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Medical students and scientific misconduct : Survey among 229 students
Gunther Eysenbach
bmj.com, 4 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Students' definition of plagiarism
Andrew Thornett
bmj.com, 5 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Policing Cheating
Jason Twinn
bmj.com, 5 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Only in Britain?
Yuri Kiselev
bmj.com, 7 Feb 2001 [Full text]
let he who is without sin...
Ian Nesbitt
bmj.com, 8 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Self Assesment
Jamie S J Wilson
bmj.com, 17 Feb 2001 [Full text]
and another thing...
Ian Nesbitt
bmj.com, 19 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Students tackle an international problem
R M Harden
bmj.com, 20 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Today's Students are probably no worse than 20 years ago
Tim Reynolds
bmj.com, 22 Feb 2001 [Full text]
Why Dundee students mark their exams
Gordon Duncan
bmj.com, 20 Mar 2001 [Full text]
Student self marking a success?!
J A Wilson
bmj.com, 31 Mar 2001 [Full text]
Scientific misconduct and International Co-operation
Sergei V. Jargin
bmj.com, 18 Nov 2003 [Full text]



Student BMJ

Risk of surgery for inflammatory bowel disease: record linkage studies

What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+

www.student.bmj.com

Listen to the latest BMJ Interview