Impact of Competition, Discipline and Religiosity on Academic Cheating in Undergraduates

Academic deviant behavior can significantly affect students' psychology, undermining their self-confidence by creating perceptions of inadequacy in achieving desired outcomes through honest efforts. This study aimed to analyze the most influential factors causing academic cheating among final-year students, emphasizing the potential moderating role of religiosity. Utilizing a quantitative correlational research design, this study engaged 674 final-year undergraduate students (Semesters 7 and 8) to explore the prevalence and determinants of deviant academic behavior. Data were collected through simple random and targeted sampling methods and analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) via the Smart Partial Least Square (PLS) program. The findings found that 83.8% of the variance in academic cheating behaviors could be attributed to discipline, competition, extrinsic motivation, punishment, and religiosity. Specifically, competition significantly influenced academic cheating (p = .64), as did extrinsic motivation (p = .21) and commitment to discipline (p = .24). However, religiosity failed to moderate the impact of competition (p = .09), extrinsic motivation (p = .12), and commitment to discipline (p = .09) on academic cheating. Additionally, religiosity was not a significant moderator in the relationship between the severity of punishment and academic cheating (p = .14). This study highlights the complex interplay of factors influencing academic cheating and underscores the limited moderating role of religiosity. The results suggest that interventions to curb academic cheating require a multifaceted approach beyond solely enhancing religiosity. Future research should further apply other potential moderating factors and develop comprehensive strategies to effectively address academic dishonesty.

Academic violations are not a new problem in the world of education, so it can be said that the phenomenon of academic violations has become a habit among students. Academic violations can be found at all levels of educational institutions (David, 2015). Cheating in college that becomes a habit harms students because students accustomed to cheating in college tend to rely on other people or certain ways to achieve learning outcomes rather than on their abilities (Reedy et al., 2021). The research elucidates a significant pattern in academic behavior, where a lack of self-confidence, discipline, responsibility, creativity, and the propensity to avoid scholarly activities are linked to academic cheating. From a psychological standpoint, this misconduct may lead to a cascade of negative emotional states, including guilt and shame, suggesting a deeper impact on the students' value systems and overall well-being (Muñoz-Izquierdo et al., 2019).
Furthermore, Purnamasari (2013) found that 97.6% of the total 250 respondents in the survey committed at least one form of academic dishonesty, and only 2.4% of students had never committed academic dishonesty Consistent with the survey (Rangkuti, 2011), a study of 298 students last year showed that students had cheated academically in various types of exams 14.1%, 16.8% copying answers, 10.1% allowing plagiarism by others, 24.5% taking exams, 10.4% copying other people's work without citing the source, 4% Operation or research data. Yumna et al. (2019) also shows in their research that academic cheating is increasing yearly.
Academic cheating that is rooted in oneself can have an impact on students' psychology. It can attack their self-confidence because they feel they will not be able to achieve what they want through honest effort. Individuals who continuously commit fraud tend to deviate from the rules; if not addressed immediately, it will impact the norms of life that will be lived in the future (Bintoro, 2013). Students accustomed to committing academic fraud will be happy to depend on the achievement of their learning outcomes on other people or specific tools and not on their abilities Students who cheat on tests or homework are likelier to engage in cheating behavior while working (Carrell et al., 2008). In addition, academic cheating will also harm the perpetrators morally, psychologically, and socially (Bintoro, 2013).
Various efforts must be made to break the chain of academic cheating problems. Several factors can lead to the discovery of academic fraud in search efforts, and the magnitude of their impact is well known. The first factor to consider is competition. Competition often causes individuals to negatively perceive others and feel anxious. As competition continues, individuals see others as enemies and generate negative thoughts about them, which can affect their relationships (Azmi & Kusaeri, 2017; Waller & Byrne, 1993). The second factor is related to external motivation. External incentives to achieve the best performance create some pressure. The closest people, such as parents, siblings, and friends, are factors that trigger students to behave fraudulently to achieve the desired goal of achieving good grades. Academic stress is the drive and motivation that students face with academic problems in their daily lives and guides them to choose great pressures to achieve their best academic performance in several ways (Dephiena, 2020).
Furthermore, the third factors relate to our inner commitment to discipline. Disciplined behaviour reflects those willing to follow the rules and show the best possible behaviour without deviating from them. On the other hand, if someone has a low commitment to discipline, they will not hesitate to break the rules, including cheating. Discipline is an aspect that can facilitate the success of the learning process in achieving educational goals. The methods and skills of the teacher in communicating the lesson determine a teaching-learning process's success. However, the students' discipline inside and outside the classroom also determines it. Discipline problems that teachers carry out encourage students to improve their learning achievements successfully. The fourth factor is related to the severity of the existing punishment. Lack of regulation and the absence of severe penalties for students guilty of academic violations still occur. Punishments that are considered minor and easy to administer are considered negligence. Most educational institutions can be punished with no penalty for assignments, exams, and other corrective actions for the first violation of academic dishonesty. However, it depends on the severity of the offense.
The influence of competitive factors on academic dishonesty has been investigated by Miller et al. (2017), and his research found that unhealthy competition with unwanted demands affects academic dishonesty. Krou et al. (2021) found that external motivational factors are too complex apart from the competition to encourage students to commit more cheating. Concerning self-ownership (Ahmad et al., 2020), poor student discipline at the university level is said to influence fraud by copying or plagiarising papers. On the other hand, similar investigations have been carried out on the severity of punishment Etgar et al. (2019) because of the low level of punishment for student offenses, students tend to ignore the compliance that should be enforced.
In addition to the four factors above, other variables can interfere with the existing relationship. Religion variable has a decisive influence on a person's attitude. Religion affects human moral behavior because religion is a guide to ethical behavior and unique beliefs to build personality. An influencer's effectiveness depends on the influencer's power the influencer and the recipient of the influencer. Every religion must have all the rules or religious orders that all its adherents must obey. And these rules influence the behaviour of followers. Following religious injunctions, people avoid what appears terrible or harmful, including academic injustice. When it comes to cheating, competition is a factor that seems to be influential. Academic injustice thrives at all levels of our education system. Dishonest behavior in college is associated with a desire for higher grades and better grades (Bates et al., 2005). There is a consensus among researchers that academic cheating has increased over the last two decades (Ahmad et al., 2020). Illegal academic behavior affects the educational environment. Schools are now required to pay for review services that assess student assignments to prevent submitted material from being plagiarized (Athanasou, 2001).
Institutional decision-making in dealing with academic fraud plays an important role. The severity of the sentence imposed shows whether the institution is willing and serious about dealing with academic cheating. If a financial institution considers fraud trivial, it will continue to happen. A study by Chirikov et al. (2019) shows that teachers' response to academic fraud plays an important role in cultivating a more honest attitude among students. Universities, in particular, can create systems that encourage the role of faculty in preventing student cheating. Such systems could include faculty training on academic integrity, policies that promote more excellent monitoring of academic dishonesty, and more severe faculty action against academic dishonesty. Dishonesty has become a national problem and is considered a serious problem among students (Biduri, 2018). Academic fraud in colleges, such as fraud and plagiarism, is becoming increasingly problematic, and the number of reported cases is steadily increasing (Miller et al., 2017). There is a growing concern that fraud and other academic misconduct could threaten the integrity of the learning process and undermine the credibility of educational programs. Academic violations are a common and permanent problem at all grade levels (Finn & Frone, 2004). It is a hot issue and is considered a serious issue among students (McCabe et al., 2012).
Previous studies often focus on isolated factors influencing academic dishonesty, neglecting the multifaceted and interconnected nature of these influences. Moreover, there's a lack of comprehensive research exploring the moderating role of religiosity on the relationship between academic cheating and its predictors, such as competition, external motivation, discipline, and punishment severity. This study introduces a novel approach by examining the moderating effect of religiosity on the dynamics between academic dishonesty and its various predictors. It aims to provide a holistic view of the problem by considering both internal and external factors and their interactions, filling a significant gap in the literature.
The prevalence of academic cheating across educational levels presents significant challenges to maintaining integrity within educational systems. Despite extensive research, the persisting issue underscores the complexity of factors influencing academic dishonesty, including personal, psychological, and external motivators. Addressing this problem requires a nuanced understanding of these factors and their interrelations, especially considering the potential long-term effects on student behavior and academic integrity.
The main objective is to investigate the direct impact of competition, external motivation, discipline, and punishment severity on academic cheating and explore how religiosity moderates these relationships. This comprehensive examination seeks to uncover potential strategies for mitigating academic dishonesty.

Hypotheses

• Competition positively affect academic cheating.
• Extrinsic motivation positively relates with academic cheating.
• Disciplinary action is negatively related with academic cheating.
• Strict sanctions negatively relates with academic cheating.
• Religiosity moderates the relationship between competition and academic cheating.
• Religiosity moderates the relationship between extrinsic motivation and academic cheating.
• Religiosity moderates the relationship between disciplinary action and academic cheating.

Method

Research Design

This study employs quantitative research methods to explore the interrelations among variables influencing academic dishonesty, using statistical analysis to process quantitative data collected through measurement instruments. The objective is to ascertain how factors such as competition, extrinsic motivation, disciplinary responsibility, and religious commitment moderate the impact of punishment severity on academic dishonesty. Utilizing correlational research, as defined by Fraenkel and Wallen (1996), this approach facilitates the examination of these variable interactions.

Sample

The target population for this investigation comprises 674 undergraduate students from the 2020/2021 academic session at UIN Raden Fatah Palembang. To ensure a representative and unbiased sample, the study combines simple random sampling and targeted sampling strategies, ultimately selecting 568 participants, primarily focusing on final-year students due to their increased susceptibility to academic deviations.

Procedures
 
Data collection was conducted via a structured questionnaire with closed-ended questions, designed for efficiency and accuracy in data acquisition. This questionnaire was systematically organized into sections for personal information, independent variables, and dependent variables, selected for its proven reliability and effectiveness in data collection (Ingleby, 2012).

Analysis

Upon collection, the data underwent processes of sorting, editing, classification, and coding before analysis using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) through the Smart PLS software. The choice of SEM for data analysis was informed by its ability to concurrently analyze multiple variables, thereby enhancing the clarity of variable relationships and achieving statistical efficiency (Ghozali & Hengky, 2015).

Results

The primary objective of this research is to investigate the direct impacts of competition, external motivation, discipline, and punishment severity on academic cheating and to explore the moderating effect of religiosity on these relationships. The study seeks to understand how these factors individually and collectively influence academic dishonesty among students. Regarding the result of data, most of students are influenced by disciplinary punishment, competition, external motivation, punishment, and religion.
Structural Equation Modeling was done to see the structural model. The figure 1 appears to be a Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) diagram summarizing the relationships between several variables and their impact on academic cheating.

Figure 1. Framework Test

• Latent Variables (Circles/Ovals): These represent constructs such as Competition, Extrinsic Motivation, Commitment to Discipline, Punishment Severity, and Religiosity, each indicated by a series of observed variables (Xs and Ms).
• Observed Variables (Rectangles with X and M): These are the measured indicators that relate to the latent variables. They are often questionnaire items or specific measures that researchers use to quantify the latent constructs.
• Dependent Variable (Circle with Y): The central outcome of interest here is Academic Cheating, which is influenced by the various latent variables.
• Path Coefficients (Numbers on the Arrows): These numbers indicate the strength and direction of the relationships between the predictors and Academic Cheating. For instance, the path from Competition to Academic Cheating might have a coefficient suggesting a strong positive relationship.
• Moderating Effects (Circles with Interaction Terms like X1*M): These represent how the relationship between predictors (e.g., Competition, Extrinsic Motivation) and Academic Cheating changes when moderated by Religiosity.
• Correlations among Latent Variables: The double-headed arrows that might be present would indicate correlations between latent variables like Competition and Extrinsic Motivation.

The summary of the data shows that competition, extrinsic motivation, commitment to discipline, and punishment severity have significant positive paths to academic cheating, suggesting they are predictors of cheating behavior. Religiosity has a direct path to academic cheating, which may indicate its impact as a standalone predictor. The interactions between each predictor and religiosity show whether religiosity modifies the effect of other variables on academic cheating. The coefficients and significance levels for these paths would indicate the nature and strength of these moderating effects.
The diagram encapsulates the complexity of factors that contribute to academic cheating and highlights the potential for religiosity to alter the influence of these factors.
A validation test is used to measure the validity or validity of a scale. In this study, validation was carried out using convergent validity and AVE. The instrument is declared valid if the AVE value is > 0.05 and the outer loading value (> 0.6) (Ghozali & Hengky, 2015).

Reliability Test

The researchers employed two types of reliability tests: Cronbach's alpha test and the combined reliability test. Cronbach Alpha assesses reliability at the lowest threshold. The data is considered good quality if the Cronbach's alpha coefficient exceeds 0.7. On the other hand, composite reliability measures the actual reliability value of a variable. Data were categorized as reliable if the combined confidence score exceeded 0.7.

Table 1
Validity Test Summary

*Note. Interaction terms represent the moderating effects of religiosity (M) on the respective.

R-Square Test

Table 2
R Square Test Result

The R-squared coefficient of determination test (R-squared) measures how other variables influence endogenous variables. Based on the data analysis conducted with the Smart PLS program, the R-Square value is displayed in Table 3 below.
After the data is analyzed, the results of the hypothesis test in the following.
The results of the Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors influencing academic cheating among students. As aforementioned the table above, following detail:
The hypothesis test on academic cheating related to competition yielded a p-value of 0.000 (p < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 7.362 (p > 1.96). It indicates a significant positive relationship between competition and academic cheating. In other words, the stronger the competition and academic variables, the more prevalent academic cheating becomes.

Table 3
Hypotheses Test

When examining the hypothesis related to extrinsic motivation and academic cheating, a p-value of 0.002 (p < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 3.357 (p > 1.96) were obtained. These results signify a significant positive relationship between extrinsic motivation and academic cheating. In essence, higher levels of extrinsic motivation are associated with increased academic misconduct.
Testing the hypothesis regarding discipline's impact on academic cheating produced a p-value of 0.007 (p < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 2.724 (p > 1.96). This outcome demonstrates a significant positive relationship between the disciplinary commitment variable and academic cheating. In simple terms, stricter disciplinary measures are linked to higher instances of academic misconduct.

The Severity of Punishment Affects Academic Cheating:

The results of the hypothesis testing related to the severity of punishment and academic cheating showed a p-value of 0.001 (p < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 3.352 (p > 1.96). These findings indicate a significant positive correlation between the severity of punishment and academic cheating. In other words, more severe penalties are associated with increased academic misconduct.

Religion Influences Academic Cheating

The hypothesis testing concerning religiosity and academic cheating resulted in a p-value of 0.035 (p < 0.05) and a t-statistic of 2.115 (p > 1.96). These results suggest a significant favorable influence of religious variables on academic cheating. In essence, stronger religious beliefs are associated with higher instances of academic misconduct.

Religion Cannot Regulate Competition in Academic Fraud:

The results of hypothesis testing concerning the moderated relationship between competition and the religiosity variable. The scores showed a p-value of 0.090, a p-value of 0.544 (p < 0.05), and a t-statistic of 0.608 (p > 1.96). These findings indicate that religiosity cannot mitigate external motivation for academic misconduct.
Religion Has No Power to Suppress the Urge to Cheat Academically:
the results of hypothesis testing for the religiosity variable moderating the relationship between extrinsic motivation and academic cheating. It yielded a value of p = 0.115, a p-value of 0.398 (p < 0.05), and a t-statistic of 0.845 (p > 1.96). These results suggest no relationship between extrinsic motivation variables and academic cheating when moderated by religion.

Religion Does Not Diminish Commitment to Academic Fraud:
The outcome of hypothesis testing for the religiosity variable moderating disciplinary commitment to academic cheating. It yielded a value of p = 0.092, a p-value of 0.205 (p < 0.05), and a t-statistic of 1.270 (p > 1.96). These findings suggest no relationship between the disciplinary commitment variable and academic cheating when moderated by religion.
Religion Can Mitigate the Severity of Sanctions for Academic Cheating:

The result of hypothesis testing indicates that the religiosity variable moderates the severity of relational punishment for academic cheating. The t-statistic obtained was 2.098 (p > 1.96), with a p-value of 0.036
(p < 0.05). These results indicate a relationship between the severity of punishment variable and academic cheating moderated by religion.

Discussion

In assessing the critical factors contributing to academic cheating among students, this study has identified disciplinary measures, competition, extrinsic motivation, and the severity of punishment as significant influences, with religiosity serving a complex moderating role. These findings prompt a discussion on the broader implications and conclusive insights into academic integrity strategies within educational environments. Personal characteristics associated with the prevalence of academic misconduct across different levels of education have garnered significant attention (Zhao et al., 2022). Many studies indicate that specific personality traits are linked to a propensity for cheating (Hendy & Biderman, 2019; Hendy & Montargot, 2019). Knowledge and religious activities influence academic dishonesty depending on where students are observed. Students with a strong sense of control believe that educational and religious activities encourage honesty, self-confidence, and spontaneous behavior (Ridwan & Diantimala, 2021). To reduce student deviance, teachers need to optimize their talents, provide the right environment to focus on their skills and create opportunities for continuous learning. Encouraging the habit of maintaining honesty and integrity is crucial. Sincere appreciation for their talents can make students feel competent and less inclined to cheat (Uyun & Warsah, 2021).
Maintaining order according to norms can introduce students to disciplinary action. The results reveal that academic staff often need a thorough understanding of academic integrity and its principles, which is believed to lead to incorrect ethical judgments by academics, ultimately resulting in unwise decision-making in the workplace. Paradoxically, the reported prevalence of misconduct among health academics is considerably higher compared to non-health academics, despite the high awareness among health academics that discipline, ethics, and integrity are critical factors in preventing dishonesty (Tiong et al., 2018). This situation can tempt students to cheat, especially in the learning environment (Wegmann & Smith, 2019). Students should take their exams honestly and strive for good grades. Religious commitment is one of the sociopsychological variables associated with various forms of academic dishonesty. Although it has been identified as a relevant variable, academic cheating still needs to be studied (Nelson et al., 2017).
Belief and behavior variables do not directly influence students' cheating behavior, but students' perceptions impact their propensity to cheat (Hadjar, 2017). Religion pertains to individual beliefs and actions related to supernatural values (Alexander, 2017). Motivation is crucial in students' inclination to commit academic violations (Arslan, 2022; Etgar et al., 2019). Students' perceptions of the seriousness of cheating influence the frequency and likelihood of such behavior (Anderman & Vaughn, 2019). For example, if a student considers copying from a friend during an exam a minor transgression, the frequency of this activity is high. People who do not view specific forms of cheating as unethical are more likely to engage in such behavior (Dejene, 2021).
Numerous factors contribute to misconduct in schools. Several studies have identified various reasons why students engage in academic dishonesty. These factors can generally be categorized as internal/ personal and external/contextual factors. Several studies have identified a lack of knowledge and predictive errors. Additionally, cheating is negatively correlated with other variables that promote academic success, such as grades, attention, self-efficacy, motivation to learn, and regular attendance (Anderman et al., 2009; Taradi et al., 2012). Social status, personality, economics, disciplinary commitment, and a history of cheating are significantly linked to academic cheating (Amponsah et al., 2021; Khodaie et al., 2011). According to Ampuni et al. (2020), high levels of academic dishonesty among students can be attributed to factors such as gender, university background, and level of study. Personal characteristics associated with the prevalence of academic misconduct across different levels of education have received much attention (Zhao et al., 2022). Many studies show that certain personality traits are associated with the tendency to cheat (Hendy & Biderman, 2019; Hendy & Montargot, 2019). The influence of knowledge and religious activities on academic dishonesty depends on the location of the student's observation. Students with a locus of control believe that educational and religious activities encourage students to be honest and confident and able to behave spontaneously (Ridwan & Diantimala, 2021). To reduce student deviation, teachers need to optimize their talents. Teachers need to provide the right energy to focus on their skills and open opportunities to continue learning. Get into the habit of maintaining honesty and integrity. Sincere appreciation for their talents will make students feel sufficient and not cheat (Uyun & Warsah, 2021)—habit of maintaining order according to norms.
This can introduce students to disciplinary action. The results show that academic staff need a better understanding of academic integrity and its principles, which is believed to lead to incorrect ethical judgments by academics, ultimately leading to unwise decision-making in the workplace. Paradoxically, the prevalence of reported misconduct among health academics is much higher compared to non-health academics, given the high awareness among health academics that discipline, ethics, and integrity are key factors leading to dishonesty (Tiong et al., 2018). This situation causes students to cheat, especially in the learning environment (Wegmann & Smith, 2019). Students take their exams honestly and try their best to get good grades. Religious commitment is one of the sociopsychological variables associated with various forms of academic dishonesty. Even though it has been identified as a relevant variable, academic cheating still needs to be researched (Nelson et al., 2017).
In addition, belief and behavior variables do not directly influence students' cheating behavior, but students' perceptions influence cheating behavior (Hadjar, 2017). Religion refers to individual beliefs and actions related to supernatural values (Alexander, 2017). Motivation plays a vital role in students' motivation to commit academic violations (Arslan, 2022; Etgar et al., 2019). Students' perceptions of the seriousness of flirting influence the frequency and likelihood of flirting (Anderman & Vaughn, 2019). For example, if a student considers copying from a friend on an exam a minor mistake, the frequency of this activity is high. People who do not consider some fraud unethical are likelier to commit fraud (Dejene, 2021). There are many reasons for bad behavior at school. Many studies have identified several reasons why students engage in academic dishonesty. However, these factors can be broadly divided into internal/personal and external/contextual factors. Several studies have identified a lack of knowledge and prediction errors.
Additionally, cheating is negatively related to other variables that guarantee academic success, such as grades, attention, self-efficacy, motivation to learn, and frequent attendance (Anderman et al., 2009; Taradi et al., 2012). Social status, personality, economics, disciplinary commitment, and history of cheating are significantly related to academic cheating (Amponsah et al., 2021; Khodaie et al., 2011). According to Ampuni et al. (2020), the high level of academic dishonesty among students can be caused by factors such as gender, university background, and level of study.
The success rate decreases, and students who engage in academic cheating employ various methods to achieve good grades despite being aware that this is an immoral act prohibited by their religion. According to Sofian (2014), citing Skinner, this occurs because the consequences and penalties for academic cheating are not strongly felt. Unlike religious laws, academic punishment cannot be directly perceived, so if applied immediately, the penalties can be effective, making even very religious students susceptible to cheating. Religion does not directly or indirectly influence the moral nature of cheating behavior (Septiana & Bakhtiar, 2020). Knowledge of one's religion is critical in bridging academic gaps and the foundation for developing students' character. The locus of control also amplifies the impact of religious knowledge on academic dishonesty, but not personality (Novianti, 2021; Ridwan & Diantimala, 2021). Onu et al. (2021) stated that students who adhere to the teachings of their religion/beliefs are less likely to commit academic fraud. Religious knowledge diminishes students' inclination to engage in dishonest academic behavior (Ayub et al., 2022; Akko, 2018; Rettinger & Jordan, 2005). When students endeavor to align their behavior with the teachings of various religions, the likelihood of academic dishonesty decreases. Therefore, internalizing and adhering to religious teachings seems vital in controlling academic dishonesty.
Extrinsic motivation is motivation that originates from external stimuli. It can be understood as motivation to initiate and sustain learning activities based on external stimuli unrelated to the learning process. It is important to emphasize that this does not imply that extrinsic motivation is inherently wrong or unimportant. Student circumstances may be dynamic and subject to change. Another factor contributing to student's lack of interest may relate to educational and learning processes requiring extrinsic motivation (Uyun & Warsah, 2021). Discipline is crucial in learning. Discipline greatly influences students' success in attaining their educational objectives. Poor student performance is not solely attributable to ability; it can also result from a lack of discipline. Discipline entails an attitude of compliance and adherence to established rules. A lack of discipline can often lead to academic violations. Students with low self-discipline are more susceptible to misconduct due to a lack of self-control (Enns et al., 2018).
Competition pertains to students' perception and attitude toward participation in the learning process, which generates competitive behavior driven by the desire to outperform their peers. An intense desire to win in the competition among students may lead them to disregard faculty rules. A competitive learning environment rewards winners such as awards, scholarships, and other incentives. Students who seek incentives to triumph in competitions are more prone to engaging in academic cheating. In such cases, if rewards outweigh the importance of assignments, students may resort to academic cheating (Gunawan & Pramadi, 2018).
Students in a competitive environment often face significant academic pressure to excel (Wideman, 2008). As individual student competition intensifies, the pressure to outperform others becomes even more pronounced (Williams & Sheridan, 2010). Consequently, students may be more inclined to employ unfair means to secure victory in the competition to meet their demands (Brown & Emmet, 2001). The perception of peer cheating is among the strongest predictors of academic misconduct (McCabe et al., 2012). Factors such as the group level, type of academic motivation, and degree of isolation warrant a thorough analysis of the student learning process (Valentina et al., 2020). Such cases can aid in enhancing curriculum design, delivery methods, and academic integrity policies and curbing participants' tendencies to seek shortcuts in their efforts to excel (Starovoytova & Namango, 2016). Emotions, performance goal orientation, competition, and peer influence contribute to academic cheating. Specifically, knowledge, competition, and peer influence academic cheating, whereas performance goal orientation does not.
In addition, this study underscores the impact of disciplinary measures, competition, extrinsic motivation, and punishment severity on academic cheating, with religiosity moderating these effects. Islamic psychology plays a crucial role in enhancing academic integrity by fostering moral values and ethical conduct aligned with Islamic teachings. Integrating Islamic psychological principles in education can motivate students to value honesty and integrity, influenced by their religious beliefs. This approach not only deters academic dishonesty but also promotes a culture of trust within educational settings. Key references supporting this include Kenia et al. (2023) on the Islamic view of self and health, Kaplick and Skinner (2017) on the intersection of Islam and psychology, Setiadi (2019) on character building in Islamic education, and Akbar and Picard (2020) on cultural and religious influences on academic integrity. These works collectively highlight the potential of Islamic principles in fostering ethical behavior and integrity in academic environments.

Implication

The study's findings have significant implications for educational institutions, educators, and policy-makers. The strong influence of disciplinary actions, competition, extrinsic motivation, and punishment on academic cheating underscores the need for a comprehensive approach to academic integrity policies. These results suggest that interventions should not only focus on punitive measures but also address competitive pressures and motivational factors that lead to academic dishonesty. Additionally, given the complex role of religiosity, which appears to moderate the relationship between punishment severity and academic cheating, educational programs should consider integrating ethical and religious education components that align with students' moral development.

Conclusion

The findings of this research illuminate the complexity of factors influencing academic cheating. Disciplinary measures, competition, extrinsic motivation, and the severity of punishment all significantly correlate with academic violations, suggesting that these areas are critical targets for intervention to reduce academic dishonesty. However, the absence of a moderating effect of religiosity on most of these relationships, except for the severity of punishment, indicates that personal beliefs may not be as influential in deterring academic dishonesty as previously thought. This calls for a broadened perspective on preventive strategies that goes beyond religiosity, emphasizing a holistic approach that considers both individual and institutional factors in promoting academic integrity.

References

Ahmad, S., Islam, M., & Amin, M. (2020). A Study of Pakistani Students’ Perceptions about Academic Dishonesty at University Level. Journal of Research & Reflections in Education (JRRE).

Akbar, A., & Picard, M. (2020). Academic integrity in the Muslim world: A conceptual map of challenges of culture. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 16, 1-20. doi.org/10.1007/s40979-020-00060-8

Akko, B. T. (2018). Pengaruh pendidikan agama islam terhadap akhlak
(perilaku jujur ). Journal of Islamic Education, 1(1), 55-70.

Alexander, K. J. (2017). Religiosity and bellicosity: The impact of religious commitment on patterns of interstate conflict. Journal of Global Security Studies, 2(4), 271-287.

Amponsah, B., Eugene, N., Dey, Y., & Oti-boadi, M. (2021). Attitude toward cheating among Ghanaian undergraduate students : A parallel mediational analysis of personality, religiosity, and mastery. Cogent Psychology, 8(1). doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2021.1998976

Ampuni, S., Kautsari, N., Maharani, M., Kuswardani, S., & Buwono, S. B. S. (2020). Academic Dishonesty in Indonesian College Students: An Investigation from a Moral Psychology Perspective. Journal of Academic Ethics, 18(4), 395-417.

Anderman, E. M., Cupp, P. K., & Lane, D. (2009). Impulsivity and academic cheating. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78(1), 135-150.

Anderman, E. M., & Won, S. (2019). Academic cheating in disliked classes. Ethics & Behavior, 29(1), 1-22.

Arslan, I. K. (2022). Examining the relationship between the thinking styles and the motivation aspects of the individuals working in the health sector in Turkey during the Covid’19 pandemic: The case of hospital staff. In Annales Médico-Psychologiques, Revue Psychiatrique.

Athanasou, J. A. (2001). Young people in transition: Factors influencing the educational-vocational pathways of Australian school-leavers. Education Training. doi.org/10.1108/00400910110394053

Ayub, N., & Iqbal, S. (2022). Religious identity and psychological well-being: Gender differences among Muslim adolescents. Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 37(1), 99-110. doi.org/10.33824/PJPR.2022. 37.1.06

Azmi, S. N., & Kusaeri, K. (2017). Menelusuri Akar Masalah Kecurangan Pelaksanaan UN di MTs Kota Surabaya. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan, 1(1).

Bates, I. P., Davies, J. G., Murphy, C., & Bone, A. (2005). A multi-faculty exploration of academic dishonesty. Pharmacy Education. doi.org/10.10 80/15602210500086264

Biduri, S. (2018). Apakah theory planned of behaviour dapat mempengaruhi perilaku academic fraud?. Journal of Accounting Science. doi.org/10.21 070/jas.v2i2.2097

Bintoro, W. (2013). Hubungan self regulated learning dengan kecurangan akademik mahasiswa Educational Psychology Journal, 2(1). https://journal. unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/epj/article/view/2587

Brown, B. S., & Emmet, D. (2001). Explaining variations in the level of academic dishonesty in studies of college students: Some new evidence. College Student Journal.

Carrell, S. E., Malmstrom, F. V., & West, J. E. (2008). Peer effects in academic cheating. Journal of Human Resources, 43(1), 173-207. doi.org/10.3368/JHR.43.1.173

Chirikov, I., Shmeleva, E., & Loyalka, P. (2019). The role of faculty in reducing academic dishonesty among engineering students, 5(12), 2464-2480. doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2019.1616169

David, L. T. (2015). Academic cheating in college students: Relations among personal values, self-esteem and mastery. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 187, 88-92. doi.10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.017

Dephiena, S. (2020). Understanding the Meanings and Factors Motivating Academic Fraud: Exploration in Accounting Students. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 30, 2257. doi.org/10.24843/eja.2020.v30.i09.p07

Dejene, W. (2021). Academic cheating in Ethiopian secondary schools: Prevalence, perceived severity, and justifications. Cogent Education, 8(11866803).

Enns, A., Eldridge, G. D., Montgomery, C., & Gonzalez, V. M. (2018). Perceived stress, coping strategies, and emotional intelligence: A cross-sectional study of university students in helping disciplines. Nurse Education Today, 68, 226-231.

Etgar, S., Blau, I., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2019). White-collar crime in academia: Trends in digital academic dishonesty over time and their effect on penalty severity. Computers and Education. doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2019.103621

Finn, K. V., & Frone, M. R. (2004). Academic performance and cheating: Moderating role of school identification and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Research, 97(3), 115-121.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. (1996). Evalididity and reliability. How to design and research in education. McGraw-Hill.

Ghozali, I., & Hengky, L. (2015). Konsep, teknik, aplikasi menggunakan Smart PLS 3.0 Untuk Penelitian Empiris. BP Undip.

Gunawan, D. A. K., & Pramadi, A. (2018). I would like to be truthful, but: A systemic study of academic dishonesty from conscientiousness, performance goal orientation, competition, and peer influence perspective. ANIMA Indonesian Psychological Journal, 33(2), 112-124.

Hadjar, I. (2017). The effect of religiosity and perception on academic cheating among muslim students in Indonesia. Journal of Education and Human Development, 6(1).

Hendy, N. T., & Biderman, M. D. (2019). Using bifactor model of personality to predict academic performance and dishonesty. The International Journal of Management Education, 17(2), 294-303.

Hendy, N. T., & Montargot, N. (2019). Understanding Academic dishonesty among business school students in France using the theory of planned behavior. The International Journal of Management Education, 17(1), 85-93.

Ingleby, E. (2012). Research methods in education. Professional Development in Education. doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2011.643130

Kaplick, P., & Skinner, R. (2017). The evolving islam and psychology movement. European Psychologist, 22, 198-204. doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/A000297

Kenia, D., Uyun, M., & Barry, M. S. (2023). Islamic religiosity and perceived behavioral control on academic cheating. International Journal of Islamic Educational Psychology, 4(1), 33-47. doi.org/10.18196/ijiep. v4i1.17743

Khodaie, E., Moghadamzadeh, A., & Salehi, K. (2011). Factors affecting the probability of academic cheating school students in Tehran. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1587-1595. doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro .2011.11.401

Krou, M. R., Fong, C. J., & Hoff, M. A. (2021). Achievement Motivation and Academic Dishonesty: A meta-analytic investigation. Educational Psychology Review, 33(2), 427-458.

McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Trevino, L. K. (2012). Cheating in college: Why students do it and what educators can do about it. The John Hopkins University Press.

Miller, A. D., Murdock, T. B., & Grotewiel, M. M. (2017). Addressing academic dishonesty among the highest achievers. Theory into Practice. doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2017.1283574

Muñoz-Izquierdo, N., Liaño, B. G. G., Rin-Sánchez, F. D., & Pascual-Ezama, D. (2019). Cheating and altruism by discipline. Dishonesty in Behavioral Economics, 163-181. doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-815857-9.0 0010-8

Nelson, M. F., James, M. S., Miles, A., Morrell, D. L., & Sledge, S. (2017). Academic integrity of millennials: The impact of religion and spirituality. Ethics & Behavior, 27(5), 385-400.

Novianti, N. (2021). Integrity, religiosity, gender: Factors Preventing on academic fraud. Asia Pacific Fraud Journal, 6(2), 321-331. doi.org/10.21532/apfjournal.v6i2.234

Onu, D. U., Onyedibe, M. C. C., Ugwu, L. E., & Nche, G. C. (2021). Relationship between religious commitment and academic dishonesty: is self-efficacy a factor? Ethics & Behavior, 31(1), 13-20.

Purnamasari, D. (2013). Faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi kecurangan akademik pada mahasiswa. Educational Psychology Journal, 2(1), 13-21.

Rangkuti, A. A. (2011). Academic cheating behaviour of accounting students: A case study in Jakarta State University. Educational Integrity: Culture and Values, 105-109.

Reedy, A., Pfitzner, D., Rook, L., & Ellis, L. (2021). Responding to the COVID-19 emergency: Student and academic staff perceptions of academic integrity in the transition to online exams at three Australian universities. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17(1), 1-32.

Rettinger, D. A., & Jordan, A. E. (2005). The relations among religion, motivation, and college cheating: A natural experiment. Ethics and Behavior, 15(2), 107-129. doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb15022

Ridwan, R., & Diantimala, Y. (2021). The positive role of religiosity in dealing with academic dishonesty. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1875541.

Septiana, E., & Bachtiar, R. R. (2020). Effect of Religiosity on Cheating Behavior in Universitas Indonesia Students With Moral Identity as a Mediating Factor, 494(Iciap 2019), 535-548. doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k. 201125.045

Setiadi, S. (2019). Character Building of integrity in arabic language instruction at islamic senior high school 20 Jakarta. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education, Language and Society. doi.org/10.5220/0009001404560459

Starovoytova, D., & Namango, S. (2016). Factors Affecting Cheating-Behavior at Undergraduate-Engineering. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(31), 66-82.

Taradi, S. K., Taradi, M., & Đogaš, Z. (2012). Croatian medical students see academic dishonesty as an acceptable behaviour: A cross-sectional multicampus study. Journal of Medical Ethics, 38(6), 376-379.

Tiong, J. J. L., Kho, H. L., Mai, C. W., Lau, H. L., & Hasan, S. S. (2018). Academic dishonesty among academics in Malaysia: A comparison between healthcare and non-healthcare academics. BMC Medical Education, 18(1), 1-10.

Uyun, M., & Warsah, I. (2021). Psikologi Pendidikan. Deepublish.

Valentina, N., & Pulyaeva, A. N. N. (2020). The relationship of basic psychological needs , academic motivation and alienation from study of students in higher education. Psikhologicheskaya Nauka I Obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 7273, 19-32.

Waller, S. W., & Byrne, N. J. (1993). Changing View of Intellectual Property and Competition Law in the European Community and the United States of America. Brooklyn Journal of International Law, 20. https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/bjil20&id=9&div=&collection=

Wegmann, K. M., & Smith, B. (2019). Examining racial/ethnic disparities in school discipline in the context of student-reported behavior infractions. Children and Youth Services Review, 103, 18-27.

Wideman, M. A. (2008). Academic dishonesty in postsecondary education: A literature review. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(1), 1-12.

Williams, P., & Sheridan, S. (2010). Conditions for collaborative learning and constructive competition in school. Educational Research, 52(4), 335-350.

Yumna, H., Khan, M. M., Ikram, M., & Ilyas, S. (2019). Use of blockchain in education: A Systematic Literature Review. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 11432 LNAI, 191-202.

Zhao, L., Peng, J., Dong, L. D., Li, Y., Mao, H., Compton, B. J., ..., & Lee, K. (2022). Effects of test difficulty messaging on academic cheating among middle school children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 220, 105417.

Received 23 October 2023
Revision received 27 February 2024