JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 1 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature) Vol. 8 No. 1, February 2023 ISSN (print): 2502-7816; ISSN (online): 2503-524X Available online at https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/index.php/joall/article/view/20968 https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v8i1.20968 Students’ understanding, attitude and experience on dishonesty and plagiarism: How undergraduate and postgraduate students of English Education resemble and/or differ 1Safnil Arsyad , 2Azwandi, 3Alamsyah Harahap 1,2,3English Education Postgraduate Program, Bengkulu University, INDONESIA Jalan WR Supratman Kandang Limun Kota Bengkulu, 38371 ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Received: March 10, 2022 Revised: Oct 27, 2022 Accepted: Nov 3, 2022 It is much easier to access literature now than before because of the existence of the internet where students can download soft files of articles or written works from journals or particular websites. However, postgraduate students especially those studying at a teacher education program should not plagiarize because they become role models for their students and should present noble behaviour for their students to be. This study investigated how much undergraduate and postgraduate students in English education are familiar with plagiarisms, how their attitudes toward plagiarism are and what may encourage them to plagiarize. The data for this study came from 151 students involved in this study by filling in the questionnaire and 6 of them were randomly selected for interview. The results show that in general there is no important difference between undergraduate and postgraduate students on their knowledge, attitude, and experiences of dishonesty and plagiarism although there are some differences in the percentage of the two groups of students on several items asked in the questionnaire. This implies that the level of education does not affect university students of their knowledge, attitude and experience on dishonesty and plagiarism. Therefore, it is recommended that specific training programs on academic writing which include moral ethic, knowledge on dishonesty and plagiarism and their practical samples in written texts to combat dishonesty and plagiarism among university students at any level. Keywords: Dishonesty Plagiarism Undergraduate students Postgraduate students English education Academic writing Conflict of interest: None Funding information: English Education Postgraduate Program research grant in 2022 Correspondence: Safnil Arsyad, English Education Postgraduate Program, Bengkulu University, INDONESIA safnil@unib.ac.id ©Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA 4.0 international license. How to cite (APA Style): Arsyad, S., Azwandi, Harahap, A. (2023). Students’ understanding, attitude and experience on dishonesty and plagiarism: How undergraduate and postgraduate students of English Education resemble and/or differ. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v8i1.20968 https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/index.php/joall/article/view/20968 https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v8i1.20968 https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.33369/joall.v8i1.20968&domain=pdf https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ https://doi.org/10.33369/joall.v8i1.20968 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4174-2556 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4942-7104 Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 2 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 With the easy access for students to get reading materials or references in the form of soft copies from the internet to write essays, papers, theses, and dissertations, the opportunities for plagiarism are also increasingly open. For students who do not want to work hard to read references, write reference summaries and rewrite them using their own words and sentences, then they will likely copy-paste the reading materials or references and consider it as their work. Some of them may not know that taking other people's opinions without acknowledging the source in the right way can be considered an act of plagiarism. Using other people’s ideas in our writing without sufficient citation is referred to as plagiarism (Liddel, 2003). According to Nguyen (2021), using other authors’ work in one’s writing as acknowledged as his or her work is called plagiarism or piracy. Therefore, it is forbidden in the academic context and considered as an act of intellectual theft of one’s property (Fusch, et al. 2017). Another type of piracy is to reuse one’s work in writing a new paper or article or which is often called self-plagiarism (Burdine, et al., 2019 and Horbach & Halffman, 2019). Other types of piracy in academic writing contexts are ‘using ghostwriting’ or buying an academic text from someone or service selling a paper or essay (Curtis & Tremayne, 2019; Dougherty, 2020; Lines, 2016; and Singh & Remenyi, 2016). Thus, plagiarism or piracy in academic writing is multiple in forms and practices which may confuse university students or new authors and find it hard to distinguish which is plagiarism and which is not. The fact shows that many college students plagiarize when writing scientific papers to do assignments given by their lecturers (Farah, 2021). There are various reasons why students plagiarize in writing essays, articles, theses and dissertations; these often relate to individual, cultural and contextual reasons (Hughes & McCabe, 2006). Other reasons are limited time used for writing, the desire to complete writing assignments as soon as possible, lack of ability to write scientific papers, unwilling to work hard in reading and process the contents of reading as material for writing and willing to get good grades from minimal effort (Nguyen, 2021). These reasons are against scientific ethics which value the authenticity and originality of scientific work and therefore this has to be eliminated. The act of plagiarism is not only found in Indonesia. In other countries, this topic has been investigated, such in Croatia by Basic, et al., (2019), in Iran by Zarfsaz & Ahmadi, (2017), in Turkey by Uzun & Kilis, (2020), in Australia by Jereb et al., (2018), and in Germany and Slovenia by Jereb et al., (2018). According to Nguyen (2021), the majority of these studies found an increase in plagiarism practices among university students. Wager (2014) suggests that to overcome complete plagiarism, it is necessary to consider the factors that encourage students to do the act of plagiarism. Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 3 Another study was conducted by Razera et al. (2010) when they surveyed 47 university students in Swedia and found that the main factors of plagiarism are lack of motivation to learn and time pressure. Stress and time pressure are also the main reasons for plagiarism in several other studies, such as Abbasi & Yoosefi-Lebni (2020) and Fatima, et al. (2019). A study by Tran (2012) revealed that international students from China, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan, Oman and Saudi Arabia, studying at La Trobe University in Australia, plagiarized due to their low English competence. Other factors that encourage students to plagiarize include pressure to get good grades while they have poor writing and time management skills (Selemani, et al., 2018), work pressure and unfair competition (Santoso & Cahaya, 2019), gender, benefits productivity, and easy internet access (Elshafei & Jahangir, 2020). Tran, et al. (2018), for example, used the Turnitin program to assess students’ assignments and the results showed that 61.7% of the 977 exam essays written by Vietnamese university students were plagiarized. Since plagiarism is a broad and important term for learning, teaching and research, it needs to be handled properly especially in a big country like Indonesia where this issue is not seriously controlled. Furthermore, students' perceptions of plagiarism have not been studied frequently in Indonesia while in international universities, the need to understand the terms, as well as training skills, for students to avoid plagiarism and dishonest acts has been considered very critical. Studies on plagiarism and dishonesty had been conducted in various countries, but research on knowledge, behavior and experiences of university students of plagiarism is still rarely done in Indonesia. A recent study on university students’ plagiarism in Indonesia was conducted by Farah (2021). She investigated Islamic university students’ attitudes on cheating and plagiarism and found that the majority of her respondents reported that they never paid someone for an exam, never changed answers after their exam papers were scored but about 50% of them often copied other students’ answers in the exam. According to Farah, the majority of Islamic university students in her study confirm academic integrity especially in exams although they often copied other students’ answers in exams. However, this study focused only on undergraduate students and did not compare the attitude of undergraduate and postgraduate students on academic dishonesty and plagiarism. A comparative study is necessary on a cheating and plagiarism topic to see if students' knowledge and attitudes on cheating and plagiarism get better as their education level increases from undergraduate to postgraduate level. Undergraduate students may have conducted plagiarism because they are new to the situation and unaware which activities are considered plagiarism or dishonesty and which ones are not while post-graduate students should have been aware of these acts since they have graduated from an undergraduate Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 4 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 program and some of them have been teachers and have to be role models for their students. This is why this study is necessary; that is to see how undergraduate and postgraduate students resemble or differ on dishonesty and plagiarism. As a guideline, the following questions are addressed. 1) What are the differences in the understanding of undergraduate and postgraduate students of English Education of Bengkulu University regarding dishonesty and plagiarism? 2) How are their attitudes towards dishonesty and plagiarism similar or different? 3) How are their experiences of being dishonest and plagiarizing similar or different? and 4) What are the factors that may encourage them to be dishonest and plagiarize? METHOD This study used a mix-method approach to obtain triangulated data to strengthen the validity of the study (Schoonenboom & Johnson, 2017). This study used a set of questionnaires to collect quantitative and qualitative data. Following Farah (2021), a simple statistical analysis of percentage calculation was carried out through a close-ended questionnaire. This is because this study focused more on the qualitative aspect rather than on the quantitative one of the student’s responses to the items in the questionnaire. The research was conducted on sixth-semester students at the undergraduate level and second and fourth-semester students at the postgraduate level in English Education at the Faculty of Education, Bengkulu University. There were approximately 151 students who took part in this research, both undergraduate and postgraduate students from the English education study program. Some of the postgraduate students of English Education at the Education Faculty University of Bengkulu had become English teachers in secondary schools but there were no undergraduate students who have become English teachers. Data Collecting Techniques This study used a set of questionnaires as a research instrument and 6 randomly selected students (four from undergraduate and two from postgraduate programs) were randomly selected to be interviewed to complete the data from the questionnaire. Each interview lasted approximately 10 minutes conducted online using the Zoom application and was recorded. After the data were collected, the data from the questionnaire were synthesized and categorized into tables to compare and contrast between the two groups of respondents (under and postgraduate students of English education at Bengkulu Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 5 University). The questionnaire and interview question list are attached in the appendix. Research Instrument The questionnaire was developed by adapting the one used by Nguyen (2021). In the first part were items to know students’ knowledge about dishonesty and plagiarism, in the second part were items to ask students’ attitude on dishonesty and plagiarism; in the third part were items related to students’ experiences in being dishonest and plagiarizing, and in the last part were items related to students views on the possible causes of them being dishonest and plagiarizing. To avoid misunderstanding or misinterpretation, the questionnaire and interview questions were written in Bahasa Indonesia. Also, to collect valid and reliable data for this research, the questionnaire was tested on 5 students from the same study programs. Feedback was collected and the questionnaire was revised based on the results of the trial. Furthermore, the questionnaire was sent to 160 students (100 undergraduate students and 60 postgraduate students) in the form of a google form; however, only 98 undergraduate students and 53 postgraduate students filled out and returned the questionnaire. FINDINGS Students’ Awareness of Plagiarism The first objective of this research is to investigate students’ knowledge of cheating and plagiarism. This section has five items with two options to answer: Agree/Not agree in the questionnaire. The students’ responses are displayed in Table 1 below. Table 1. Students’ awareness of dishonesty and plagiarism No Statement Undergraduate Students Postgraduate Students Agree Disagree Agree Disagree 1. Using texts, information, data, and images in your work without proper citation is considered plagiarism 96% 4% 96% 4% 2. Stealing others’ work is considered plagiarism 98% 2% 100% - 3. Copy-pasting part of others’ work is considered plagiarism 96% 4% 98% 2% 4. Using one’s work without proper citation is considered plagiarism or self-plagiarism 45% 55% 49% 51% 5. Direct quoting too many ideas from one reference is considered plagiarism 45% 55% 51% 49% Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 6 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 Table 1 indicates that there is no important difference between the knowledge of plagiarism between undergraduate and postgraduate students of English education at Bengkulu University on the five items stated in the questionnaire. The majority of them are already aware of what activities are considered plagiarism and which ones are not. However, both groups of students are not yet aware that self-plagiarism and citing too much from one source can be also considered plagiarism. According to the students in the interview, their lecturers never discuss dishonesty and plagiarism comprehensively in writing classes. They only know dishonest and plagiarism acts from their thesis supervisors when they write an undergraduate thesis. Students’ Attitudes towards Plagiarism The second objective of this study is to know the students’ attitudes toward plagiarism. This section also has five items with 5 options in the questionnaire. The respondents were asked whether or not they consider the acts below acceptable by choosing: 1. absolutely acceptable (AA); 2: acceptable (A); 3: no idea (NI); 4: unacceptable (UA) and 5: completely unacceptable (CU). Table 2. Students’ attitudes towards dishonesty and plagiarism No Statement Undergraduate Students Postgraduate Students AA&A NI UA&AU AA&A NI UA&CU 1. Copy-pasting 7% 5% 88% 2% 2% 96% 2. Doing others’ work 11% 19% 70% 2% 11% 87% 3. Asking others to do your work 9% 13% 78% - 4% 96% 4. Changing details of someone’s work and making it your own 2% 1% 97% - - 100% 5. Buying others’ work 11% 28% 61% 1% 23% 76% As indicated in Table 2, there is no important difference between undergraduate and postgraduate students in their attitude toward cheating and plagiarism in academic activities. However, some students reported that they do not know whether or not buying others’ work is unacceptable or completely unacceptable. In the interview, the students reported that although some of them are not aware that buying other students’ work is unacceptable or completely unacceptable, they never do it. The students also think that plagiarism is similar to stealing others’ work and therefore, it must be forbidden. Students’ Experiences with Plagiarism Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 7 The third objective of this study is to know how much the students had devoted to cheating and plagiarism. This section also has five items with 4 options. Respondents were asked whether they conducted any type of plagiarism acts: 1: never (N); 2: rarely (R); 3: sometimes (S); 4: often (O). Table 3. Students’ experiences with plagiarism No Statement Undergraduate Students Postgraduate Students N R S O N R S O 1. Copying other students’ work 31% 50% 18% 1% 66% 23% 11% - 2. Doing other students’ work 67% 17% 17% 13% 77% 14% 3% 1% 3. Using ghost writers’ services 97% 3% - - 96% 4% - - 4. Buying other’s work from the internet 96% 2% - - 98% - 2% - 5. Copying internet sources and making it your work 79% 13% 8% - 93% 5% 2% - Table 3 shows that both groups of students are different in copying other students’ work; 50% of undergraduate students copy other students’ work although they rarely did it while only 23% of postgraduate students did it. Also, 13% of undergraduate students reported that they often do other students’ work while only 1% of postgraduate students often do it. Thus, in these two experiences, postgraduate students are better than undergraduate students although the difference may not be crucial. However, the data from the interview reveal that all students ever conducted plagiarism because they were not aware that it was plagiarism. When they know more about what is allowed and what is not allowed in writing an academic text, the students reported that they never plagiarize. Factors Affecting Students’ Plagiarism The final section of the questionnaire is about aspects influencing students’ cheating and plagiarism. This section has 10 items with two options to answer: Agree/Disagree. Table 4. Factors affecting students’ plagiarism No Statement Undergraduate Students Postgraduate Students Agree Disagree Agree Disagree 1. Time pressure 99% 1% 79% 21% 2. Weak possibility of sanction 60% 40% 57% 43% Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 8 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 3. Weak possibility of being reported 71% 29% 60% 40% 4. To obtain good grades 74% 26% 59% 41% 5. A very common act today 88% 12% 64% 36% 6. Lack of lesson comprehension 88% 12% 74% 26% 7. Hard to do works without plagiarism 66 34 59 41 8. Original texts are too good to paraphrase 70 30 74 26 9. Lack of paraphrasing skills 84 16 93 7 10. Lack of learning motivation 77 23 77 23 Data in Table 4 show that undergraduate and postgraduate students are different in viewing the possible causes of students’ plagiarism; 99% of undergraduate students believe that students plagiarize because of time pressure while only 79% of postgraduate students believe so. Also, 88% of undergraduate students believe that they plagiarize because it is already a very common act today while only 64% of postgraduate students believe so and 74% of undergraduate students think that they plagiarize to get good grades and only 59% of postgraduate students think so. Although the differences are not very important, postgraduate students are better in these aspects than undergraduate students. The data from the interviews echoed those obtained from the questionnaire. According to the students, they conducted plagiarism because they do not have good ideas about what to write in their essays, papers or thesis while they are willing to get good grades from the lecturers. The students also reported that when they met students who plagiarize, they would tell them not to because it is forbidden and there will be severe consequences for doing it. The students in the interview suggest that to reduce the act of plagiarism among the students, there should be a lecture on the topic at the beginning of the semester. The students should be introduced the do’s and dont’s in academic writing and the consequences of plagiarism they may receive from the lecturers. Some students even suggest that there should be a contract assigned by the students that they will not plagiarize in their writing and if they do they will accept certain punishments from the lectures. DISCUSSION The first finding in this research is that the majority of the students in both groups already know which ones are considered plagiarism acts and which ones are not; however, they are not yet aware that self-plagiarism and citing too much from one source can be also considered plagiarism. This is probably because the use of the Turnitin application in academic activities at universities in Indonesia including Bengkulu University is still recent; several students may Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 9 not be aware yet that self-plagiarism and citing too much from one source are considered plagiarism. According to Mehic (2013), using our ideas or texts already published in a media in new work and accepting it as the original is classified as ‘self-plagiarism’ and it is considered as bad as plagiarism or ‘dishonesty’ although not as ‘intellectual theft’ (p.1). Andreescu (2013:779) claims that ‘self-plagiarism is a serious offense because, after all, it is a species of plagiarism, which in most cases is perceived as a serious offense’. Thus, self- plagiarism is considered one type of plagiarism and students (undergraduate and postgraduate) should avoid it when writing their academic texts, such as essays, papers, articles, thesis, or dissertations. A study conducted by Nguyen (2021) on 120 university students in Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam found similar results that students lacked the necessary knowledge about plagiarism and the techniques for avoiding plagiarism acts when writing academic texts. According to Nguyen, her findings supported previous study results scrutinizing the same topic, such as by Bamford & Sergiou (2005), Rets & Ilya (2018) and Sarlauskiene & Stabingis (2014). Rets & Ilya (2018), for example, found that English education students in Turkey were able to define plagiarism well but were unsuccessful in identifying examples of plagiarism acts in written texts. Similarly, Sarlauskiene & Stabingis (2014) found that, although university students in Lithuania could confidently define what plagiarism was, they failed to identify examples of plagiarism acts in written texts. According to Sarlauskiene & Stabingis, ‘[c]omprehensive and clear definition of plagiarism and various types of it with practical examples could help the academic community to develop plagiarism prevention’ (p.638). Thus, university students need to be familiar with not only knowledge but also practical examples of plagiarism acts in written texts and know how to avoid them in their writing. The second finding in this study is that some students in both groups do not know that buying other students’ work is unacceptable or completely unacceptable. This is probably because they never read references about plagiarism although they are plenty available on the internet. According to Sivasubramaniam et al. (2016), buying others’ work or using ghostwriter services is considered academic fraud, similar to ‘fabrication of data’, ‘falsifying references’, ‘multiple ‘submissions’, ‘collusion’, ‘sabotage’ and ‘contract cheating’ (p.1). Sivasubramaniam et al., further suggest that plagiarism and ghostwriting are the two most frequent types of scholarly fraud which can poison academic practices. Nguyen (2021) found that Vietnamese university students never bought work from others or ghostwriting services. According to Nguyen, this is because the majority of university students in Vietnam came from lower earnings families. Therefore, the students do not have enough money to do so. Matheson (2016) suggests that a ghostwriter is ‘a person whose job it is to write Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 10 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 material for someone else who is the named author’ (p.1). Students who have enough money may use this service to do their academic work, such as to write an essay, paper, article, thesis or dissertation. The third finding is that more undergraduate students than postgraduate students often copy other students’ work although they rarely do it. Also, more undergraduate students often do other students’ work than postgraduate students. This implies among other things that, postgraduate students are more independent than undergraduate students in doing the academic work assigned by their lecturers. Another possible reason is that post- graduate students are more confident in doing their academic work than undergraduate students since they have had experiences doing similar work when they studied in an undergraduate program. Nguyen (2021) also found that all students in her research subjects admitted to a kind of academic dishonesty. According to Nguyen, her findings are in line with those of other researchers, such as Basic et al. (2019) and Uzun and Kilis (2020). Basic et al. (2019) found that students' knowledge and attitude toward plagiarism were not related to their acts of plagiarism. According to Basic et al., although students had positive attitudes toward plagiarism and academic integrity, they were not familiar with referencing rules and therefore, they may have conducted academic dishonesty or plagiarism. Uzun & Kilis (2020) found that essential indicators for plagiarism and dishonesty in academic writing practices are moral integrity, behavior, knowledge, and previous experiences. According to Uzun & Kilis, the most effective technique to fight against plagiarism is via education, such as writing courses for university students which include moral integrity and knowledge of plagiarism. The final finding in this study is that more undergraduate students view the time pressure to complete academic work, the view that plagiarism is already a very common act today and the willingness to get good grades are the main causes of students’ plagiarism acts. This is probably because since undergraduate students usually take more subjects each semester than postgraduate students do, they have less time to do their assignments. Another possible reason is that grades are more important for undergraduate students than for postgraduate students because, with good grades, they can apply for higher-paid job vacancies than if they obtain lower grades after they graduate. Some postgraduate students, on the other hand, have obtained permanent work before they start taking a postgraduate education. Nguyen (2021) also found that time constraints are the common reason for university students to plagiarize or be dishonest. Other main causes for plagiarism are poor motivation to study (Fatima et al, 2019), poor English writing ability (Tran, 2012), and willingness to obtain high marks (Selemani et al., 2018). However, according to Nguyen easy access to internet materials was not found to be the main factor that cause students to plagiarize. This is Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 11 probably because using materials from the internet can be detected by the Turnitin computer evaluation program and this will cause the students’ work to get rejected or to get poor marks. CONCLUSION In general, there is no important difference between undergraduate and postgraduate students in their knowledge, attitude, and experiences of dishonesty and plagiarism although there are some differences in the percentage of the two groups of students on several items asked in every part of the questionnaire. For example, more undergraduate students are not yet aware that self-plagiarism and citing too much from one source can be also considered plagiarism. Also, more postgraduate students reported that they never do work for other students than undergraduate students did. This implies that the level of education does not affect university students of their knowledge, attitude and experience of dishonesty and plagiarism. This study is not without limitations. The university students involved in this study came only from two study programs of the education faculty of the University of Bengkulu. Therefore, the results may not show the real condition of students’ knowledge, attitude and experiences of being dishonest and plagiarizing in other study programs in the same or different faculties and universities. It also acknowledged that not all aspects of plagiarism were included in the questionnaire of this study, such as what kind of paraphrase of one’s work is acceptable in an academic text, what similarity score is acceptable in an academic text, and so on. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out a similar study that includes a larger size of population and samples to obtain more comprehensive information on students’ knowledge, attitude and experiences on dishonesty and plagiarism with a more complete set of questionnaires. Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that study programs at undergraduate and postgraduate levels should offer special training to eradicate acts of dishonesty and plagiarism acts among the students. The training programs should include the teaching of moral ethics in academic practices, knowledge of dishonesty and plagiarism, samples of dishonesty and plagiarism acts in written texts, techniques of paraphrasing materials cited from references and appropriate citing techniques in academic writing. The outcomes of these training programs will help universities combat dishonesty and plagiarism acts among students at undergraduate and post-graduate levels of all study programs, faculties and universities. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank the English Education Postgraduate Program of the Education Faculty of the University of Bengkulu for funding the present Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 12 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 study. This study was supported by the 2022 Annual Competitive Grant from the University of Bengkulu. REFERENCES Abbasi, P., Yoosefi-Lebni, J., Jalali, A., Ziapour, A. & Nouri, P. (2020). Causes of plagiarism: a grounded theory study. Nursing Ethics, 28(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733020945753 Andreescu, L. (2013). Self-Plagiarism in Academic Publishing: The Anatomy of a Misnomer. Sci Eng Ethics, 19, 775–797. DOI 10.1007/s11948-012-9416- 1 Basic, Z., Kruzic, I., Jerkovic, I., Buljan, I. & Marusic, A. (2019). Attitudes and knowledge about plagiarism among university students: a cross- sectional survey at the University of Split, Croatia. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(5), 1467–1483. doi:10.1007/s11948-018-0073-x Bamford, J. & Sergiou, K. (2005). International students and plagiarism: An analysis of the reasons for plagiarism among international foundation students. Investigations in University Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 17-22. Retrieved 21 January 2022 from http://repository.londonmet.ac.uk/id/eprint/173 Burdine, L. K., de Castro Maymone, M. B. & Vashi, N. A. (2019). Text recycling: Self-plagiarism in scientific writing. International Journal of Women's Dermatology, 5(2), 134–136. doi:10.1016/j.ijwd.2018.10.002 Curtis, G. J. & Tremayne, K. (2019). Is plagiarism really on the rise? Results from four 5-yearly surveys. Studies in Higher Education, 1–11. doi:10.1080/03075079.2019.1707792 Dougherty, M. V. (2020). ‘Magisterial plagiarism’ in Disguised academic plagiarism (pp. 75–101). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. doi:10.1007/978- 3-030-46711-1_5 Elshafei, H. A. & Jahangir, T. M. (2020). Factors affecting plagiarism among students at Jazan University. Bulletin of the National Research Centre, 44(1), 1–5. doi:10.1186/s42269-020-00313-z Fatima, A., Abbas, A., Ming, W., Hosseini, S. & Zhu, D. (2019). Internal and external factors of plagiarism: Evidence from Chinese public sector universities. Accountability in research, 26(1), 1–16. doi:10.1080/08989621.2018.1552834 Farah, R. B. (2021). Exploring Muslim Pre-Service Teachers’ Honesty on Cheating and Plagiarism: A Survey in Indonesian Islamic University, Dinamika Ilmu, 21(1), 139-149. http://doi.org/10.21093/di.v21i1.3175 Fusch, P. I., Ness, L. R., Booker, J. M. & Fusch, G. E. (2017). The ethical implications of plagiarism and ghostwriting in an open society. Journal of Social Change, 9(1), 4. doi:10.5590/JOSC.2017.09.1.04 Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 13 Horbach, S. S. & Halffman, W. W. (2019). The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’. Research Policy, 48(2), 492–502. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2017.09.004 Hughes, J. M. C., & McCabe, D. L. (2006). Academic Misconduct within Higher Education in Canada.pdf. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 36(2), 1–21. Jereb, E., Perc, M., Lammlein, B., Jerebic, J., Urh, M., Podbregar, I. & Sprajc, P. (2018). Factors influencing plagiarism in higher education: a comparison of German and Slovene students. PloS One, 13(8), e0202252. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202252 Liddell, J. (2003). A comprehensive definition of plagiarism. Community & Junior College Libraries, 11(3), 43–52. doi:10.1300/J107v11n03_07 Lines, L. (2016). Ghostwriters guaranteeing grades? The quality of online ghost-writing services availableto tertiary students in Australia. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 889–914. doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1198759 Matheson, A. (2016). Ghostwriting: the importance of definition and its place in contemporary drug marketing. British Medical Journal (BMJ), 354:i4578, 1-7. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4578 Mehic. B. (2013). Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism, Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258053483 Nguyen, D.T.T., (2021). University students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on plagiarism. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 16(4), 1471-1478. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9668-056X Razera, D., Verhagen, H., Pargman, T. C. & Ramberg, R. (2010). Plagiarism awareness, perception, and attitudes among students and teachers in Swedish higher education—a case study. In 4th International Plagiarism Conference-Towards an authentic future. Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/24 2738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_stude nts_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_- _a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness- perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish- higher-education-a-case-study.pdf Rets, I. & Ilya, A. (2018). Eliciting ELT students’ understanding of plagiarism in academic writing. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 193–211. doi:10.32601/ejal.464115 Santoso, A. & Cahaya, F. R. (2019). Factors influencing plagiarism by accounting lecturers. Accounting Education, 28(4), 401–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2018.1523736 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/HarkoVerhagen/publication/242738794_Plagiarism_awareness_perception_and_attitudes_among_students_and_teachers_in_Swedish_higher_education_-_a_case_study/links/0c96053193ee794bee000000/Plagiarism-awareness-perception-and-attitudes-among-students-and-teachers-in-Swedish-higher-education-a-case-study.pdf Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 14 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 Selemani, A., Chawinga, W. D. & Dube, G. (2018). Why do postgraduate students commit plagiarism? An empirical study. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 14(1), 1–15. doi:10.1007/s40979-018-0029-6 Singh, S. & Remenyi, D. (2016). Plagiarism and ghost-writing: The rise in academic misconduct. South African Journal of Science, 112(5–6), 1–7. doi:10.17159/sajs.2016/20150300 Schoonenboom, J. & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(2), 107–131. doi:10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1 Sarlauskiene, L. & Stabingis, L. (2014). Understanding of Plagiarism by the Students in HEIs of Lithuania. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 110, 638–646. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.908 Sivasubramaniam, A., Kostelidou, K. & Ramachandran, S. (2016). A close encounter with ghost-writers: an initial exploration study on background, strategies and attitudes of independent essay providers. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 12(1), 1-14. DOI 10.1007/s40979-016-0007-9 Tran, T. T. (2012). The perceptions and attitudes of international students towards plagiarism. The ACPET Journal for Private Higher Education, 1(2), 13–21. http://hdl.handle.net/ULIS_123456789/1093 Uzun, A. M. & Kilis, S. (2020). Investigating antecedents of plagiarism using an extended theory of Planned behaviour. Computers& Education, 144. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103700 Wager, E. (2014). Defining and responding to plagiarism. Learned Publishing, 27(1), 33–42. doi:10.1087/20140105 Zarfsaz, E. & Ahmadi, R. (2017). Investigating some main causes and reasons of writing plagiarism in an EFL Context. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 6(5), 214–223. doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.5p.21 Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 15 THE AUTHORS Safnil Arsyad is a professor of English Language Education at the Languages and Arts Department of the Education Faculty of the University of Bengkulu in Bengkulu Indonesia. His research interests are in discourse analysis of academic texts and English teaching and learning materials. Azwandi is an assistant professor at the English Education Postgraduate Program of the Education Faculty of the University of Bengkulu. His research interest is in sociolinguistics and English language teaching. Alamsyah Harahap is an associate professor at the English Education Postgraduate Program of the Education Faculty of the University of Bengkulu. His research interests are classroom discourse analysis and English teaching and learning materials. Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 16 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 APPENDIX Questionnaire Angket Tentang Plagiat Mahasiswa Sarjana dan Pascasarjana Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris FKIP Universitas Bengkulu (Diataptasi dari Nguyen, 2021) Angket ini dimaksudkan untuk mengetahui pengetahuan, sikap, pengalaman dan factor-faktor yang mungkin menyebabkan mahasiswa sarjana dan pascasarjana melakukan tindakan plagiat dalam menulis karya ilmiah seperti: esai, skripsi, tesis, disertasi atau artikel dalam Bahasa Indonesia maupun Bahasa Inggris. Kami akan menjamin kerahasiaan informasi yang anda sampaikan dalam angket ini. Data dari angket hanya akan digunakan untuk penelitian ini saja dan tidak akan digunakan untuk keperluan lain. Kami berterima kasih banyak atas partisipasi anda dalam mengisi angket ini dengan informasi yang sebenarnya dan mengirimkannya kembali pada kami. Mahasiswa : Sarjana/pascasarjana Jenis kelamin : laki-laki/perempuan Semester : VI (enam)/IV (empat) atau II (dua) A. Pengetahuan Tentang Tindakan Plagiat No. Pernyataan Setuju Tidak setuju 1. Menggunakan teks, informasi, data, gambar dll. dari tulisan orang lain tampa mencantumkan sumbernya dengan benar dan mamadai merupakan tindakan plagiat 2. Mengambil karya orang lain dan mengakuinya sebagai karya sendiri merupakan tindakan plagiat 3. Menggunakan karya sendiri yang sudah terbit lebih dari 30% bagian untuk menulis karya yang baru merupakan tindakan plagiat 4. Mengcopy sebagian karya orang lain tanpa mencantumkan sumbernya dengan benar dan memadai merupakan tindakan plagiat 5. Terlalu banyak menggunakan kutipan langsung (direct quotation) dalam sebuah karya ilmiah merupakan tindakan plagiat Students’ understandings, attitudes and experiences on dishonesty…. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 17 B. Sikap Mahasiswa terhadap Tindakan Plagiat No. Pernyataan Sangat boleh Plagiat tapi dibolehkan Tidak tahu Tidak boleh Sangat tidak boleh 1. Mengcopy tugas mahasiswa lain 2. Mengerjakan tugas untuk mahasiswa lain 3. Menyuruh mahasiswa lain mengerja tugas kuliah anda 4. Merubah identitas karya orang lain dan meggantinya dengan identitas anda 5. Membeli tulisan ilmiah melalui internet C. Pengalaman Mahasiswa dalam Melakukan Plagiat No. Pernyataan Tidak pernah Jarang Kadang- kadang Sering 1. Mengcopy tugas orang/mahasiswa lain 2. Mengerjakan tugas untuk orang/mahasiswa lain 3. Menggunakan jasa ‘ghostwriter’ di internet 4. Membeli karya ilmiah dari internet 5. Mengcopypaste karya ilmiah orang lain di internet dan mengakuinya sebagai karya sendiri Safnil Arsyad, Azwandi, Alamsyah Harahap 18 JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature), 8(1), 2023 D. Faktor-Faktor yang Menyebabkan Mahasiswa Melakukan Plagiat No. Pernyataan Setuju Tidak setuju 1. Tekanan waktu karena harus segera menyerahkan tugas kuliah 2. Lemahnya sanksi yang diberikan oleh dosen atau program studi 3. Kecilnya kemungkinan akan dilaporkan ke dosen atau pengelola program studi 4. Agar mendapatkan nilai yang baik atau tinggi 5. Mahasiswa lain juga melakukan tindakan plagiat 6. Kurangnya pemahaman terhadap pelajaran yang diberikan oleh dosen 7. Sulit menghindari tindakan plagiat 8. Kata atau kalimat dari sumber bacaan terlalu bagus untuk disampaikan kembali dengan kata atau kalimat sendiri 9. Lemahnya keterampilan mahasiswadalam memparafrase kutipan dari karya orang lain 10. Lemahnya motivasi belajar mahasiswa Interview Questions 1. Apa saja bentuk tindakan curang dan plagiat? 2. Bagaimana menurut anda tindakan curang dan plagiat? 3. Menurut anda mengapa mahasiswa melakukan tindakan kecurangan dan plagiat? 4. Bagaimana sebaiknya agar mahasiswa tidak melakukan kecurangan dan plagiat? 5. Pernahkan anda melihat mahasiswa melakukan keuarangan dan plagiat? 6. Apa yang akan anda lakukan bila melihat atau mengetahui ada mahasiswa 7. Penahkah anda melakukan tindakan kecurangan dan plagiat?