TABLE 5.
Factor | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | α |
1. AI Policy USE | – | 0.24*** | −0.20*** | −0.12** | −0.13*** | −0.14*** | 0.74 |
2. Peer Disapproval of AD | 0.21*** | – | −0.12** | −0.30*** | −0.27*** | −0.24*** | 0.78 |
3. Peer Engagement in AD | −0.26*** | −0.18*** | – | 0.22*** | 0.07* | 0.10** | 0.83 |
4. Assignment Cheating | −0.17*** | −0.25*** | 0.20*** | – | 0.43*** | 0.47*** | 0.70 |
5. Plagiarism | −0.12** | −0.15*** | −0.15*** | 0.48*** | – | 0.48*** | 0.85 |
6. Test or Exam Cheating | –0.08 | −0.12** | 0.08* | 0.36*** | 0.47*** | – | 0.90 |
α | 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.82 | 0.69 | 0.85 | 0.89 |
Intercorrelations and Cronbach’s alphas (α) for the 2012 Cohort (n = 780) are presented above the diagonal, and intercorrelations and α for the 2017 Cohort (n = 608) are presented below the diagonal. AI, academic integrity; AD, academic dishonesty; USE, understanding, support, and effectiveness. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.