Abstract
M.A. (Industrial Sociology)
Academic dishonesty is a growing global concern, with alarmingly high incidence rates in
academic institutions. This problem is particularly acute in the South African context.
Research in various contexts has identified whistleblowing as a mechanism to curb the
incidence of academic dishonesty. This study attempted to measure the relationship
between academic dishonesty and whistleblowing, and framed itself within the reasoned
action approach to accomplish this. The aim was to identify the variables associated with
reporting of academic dishonesty in a higher education setting. Literature within the South
African context concerning academic dishonesty and whistleblowing is not abundant, thus
this research aimed to contribute to filling this gap. A partially mixed sequential dominant
status design was utilised for the study. In Phase 1 recurring themes were derived from
literature regarding the topic, and a qualitative approach was then used to evaluate the
usefulness of those themes for the quantitative phase. The information of Phase 1 was
used to determine whether the questionnaire for Phase 2 had appropriately phrased
questions. Phase 2 entailed a survey with a sample of 405 undergraduate sociology
students. Data collection occurred using a self-administered structured questionnaire,
voluntarily completed electronically by students given access to the link. Analysis
indicated that the two main factors associated with students’ willingness to report
academic dishonesty are sex and year of study. Five factors mediate the willingness to
report academic dishonesty. These are students’ general honesty, their level of academic
honesty; the justification for committing academic dishonesty; their justification for not
reporting academic dishonesty; and their justification for reporting academic dishonesty.
The research concurred with literature reviewed, that students with higher degrees of
general honesty are more willing to report academic dishonesty, that the fear of retaliation
contributes to an unwillingness to report academic dishonesty, and that institutional rules;
norms and procedures influence students to report academic dishonesty.
Recommendations for future studies of this nature include that the period in which the
research is conducted is carefully considered, ensuring that it is not out of the ordinary
e.g. during student protests or exam periods, to avoid undue influence of students’
responses. Research could also include a wider range of students to determine if the
findings are faculty-specific.