PERGULATAN ETIKA DAN MOTIVASI: PERSPEKTIF PSIKOLOGI TERHADAP CONTRACT CHEATING DI KALANGAN MAHASISWA

Mediantari Oktavianti* -  Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia
Suryanto Suryanto -  Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia
DOI : 10.33024/jpm.v8i1.19925

Supp. File(s): Plagiarism Check

Abstrak

Maraknya praktik contract cheating di kalangan mahasiswa merupakan bentuk kecurangan akademik yang berpotensi merusak integritas pendidikan tinggi. Penelitian kualitatif ini menggunakan pendekatan grounded theory dengan metode wawancara mendalam untuk mengeksplorasi karakteristik, dinamika perilaku, dan faktor-faktor yang memengaruhi contract cheating. Analisis data dilakukan menggunakan axial coding dan conditional/consequential coding. Partisipan dalam penelitian ini adalah mahasiswa yang pernah menggunakan layanan joki tugas, dengan rentang usia 18-25 tahun. Hasil penelitian mengidentifikasi dua tema utama dalam dinamika perilaku contract cheating: (1) Sikap terhadap contract cheating, di mana partisipan umumnya memiliki pandangan positif terhadap praktik ini; dan (2) Strategi regulasi perilaku, yang mencakup berbagai cara yang digunakan partisipan untuk menghindari deteksi. Selain itu, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa faktor pendorong contract cheating terdiri atas faktor internal dan eksternal. Faktor internal meliputi efikasi diri dan manajemen waktu, sedangkan faktor eksternal mencakup normalisasi contract cheating dalam lingkungan pertemanan serta kemudahan akses terhadap layanan tersebut. Temuan ini memberikan wawasan mendalam mengenai mekanisme yang menopang contract cheating dan menekankan pentingnya kebijakan institusional untuk menjaga integritas akademik.

 

Kata Kunci: Contract Cheating, Grounded Theory, Joki Tugas, Kecurangan Akademik, Mahasiswa.

 

Abstract

The prevalence of contract cheating among university students represents a form of academic dishonesty that threatens the integrity of higher education. This qualitative study employs a grounded theory approach using in-depth interviews to explore the characteristics, behavioral dynamics, and influencing factors of contract cheating. Data analysis was conducted using axial coding and conditional/consequential coding. The participants in this study were students aged 18–25 who had previously used academic ghostwriting services. The findings identify two main themes in the behavioral dynamics of contract cheating: (1) Attitudes toward contract cheating, where participants generally held positive views about this practice; and (2) Behavioral regulation strategies, which encompass various methods employed by participants to avoid detection. Furthermore, this study reveals that the driving factors behind contract cheating consist of both internal and external factors. Internal factors include self-efficacy and time management, while external factors involve the normalization of contract cheating within peer environments and the accessibility of such services. These findings provide in-depth insights into the mechanisms sustaining contract cheating and highlight the importance of institutional policies in maintaining academic integrity.

 

Keywords: Academic Dishonesty; Academic Ghostwriter; Contract Cheating; Grounded Theory; University Students.

Supplement Files

Keywords : academic dishonesty; academic ghostwriter; contract cheating; grounded theory; university students.

  1. Amelia, E., & Kurniawan, D. J. (2023). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Penggunaan Jasa Joki Tugas Oleh Pelajar Dan Mahasiswa. Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, 2(2).
  2. Bandura, A. (Ed.). (1995). Self-efficacy in changing societies. Cambridge University Press.
  3. Baran, L., & Jonason, P. K. (2020). Academic dishonesty among university students: The roles of the psychopathy, motivation, and self-efficacy. PLOS ONE, 15(8), e0238141. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238141
  4. Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., Saddiqui, S., & Van Haeringen, K. (2019). Contract cheating: A survey of Australian university students. Studies in Higher Education, 44(11), 1837–1856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788
  5. Clarke, R., & Lancaster, T. (n.d.). Eliminating the successor to plagiarism? Identifying the usage of contract cheating sites.
  6. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1998). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria.
  7. Curtis, G. J., McNeill, M., Slade, C., Tremayne, K., Harper, R., Rundle, K., & Greenaway, R. (2022). Moving beyond self-reports to estimate the prevalence of commercial contract cheating: An Australian study. Studies in Higher Education, 47(9), 1844–1856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2021.1972093
  8. Dewi, S. N. (2020). Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa: Dimensi Fraud Diamond.
  9. Erguvan, I. D. (2022). University students’ understanding of contract cheating: A qualitative case study in Kuwait. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00208-y
  10. Ferguson, C. D., Toye, M. A., & Eaton, S. E. (2023). Contract Cheating and Student Stress: Insights from a Canadian Community College. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21(4), 685–717. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09476-6
  11. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
  12. Glover, R. A., Kpodo, C. S., & Sosu, S. A. (2024). Contract Cheating ‘Pseudepigraphy’. A Cardinal Sin in Higher Education? A Phenomenological Narrative of Andragogical Experiences, Insights and Reflections. E-Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 3140–3156. https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.202451636
  13. Heriyati, D., Sari, R. L., Ekasari, W. F., & Kurnianto, S. (2023). Understanding Contract Cheating Behavior Among Indonesian University Students: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21(3), 541–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-023-09470-y
  14. Kristiana, I. F., Suryanto., & Hendriani, W. (2019). How to Make Grounded the Preferred Approach to Psychological Research? A Systematic Review. 8(3).
  15. 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09557-7
  16. Kusuma, A. N. (2022). The state of self-regulated learning and academic dishonesty of undergraduate students during online learning. Psychological Research and Intervention, 5(1), 19–27. https://doi.org/10.21831/pri.v5i1.49441
  17. Lancaster, T., & Cotarlan, C. (2021). Contract cheating by STEM students through a file sharing website: A Covid-19 pandemic perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 17(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-021-00070-0
  18. Lancaster, T., Glendinning, I., Foltýnek, T., Dlabolová, D., & Linkeschová, D. (2019). The Perceptions of Higher Education Students on Contract Cheating and Educational Corruption in South East Europe. Journal of Educational Thought / Revue de La Pensée Educative, 52(3), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/jet.v52i3.69722
  19. McCabe, D. L., Butterfield, K. D., & Trevino, L. K. (2012). Cheating in College What Students Do It and What Educators Can Do about It. Johns Hopkins University Press.
  20. Nagy, V., & Groves, A. (2021). Rational choice or strain? A criminological examination of contract cheating. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 33(3), 322–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2021.1874603
  21. Pacino, A. (2021). An Investigation into Contract Cheating in Tertiary Education, and How to Combat the Problem in a United Arab Emirates Context. Middle Eastern Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences, 2(4), 120–135. https://doi.org/10.47631/mejress.v2i4.344
  22. Patton, M. Q (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3 ed). Sage Publications.
  23. Paulus, D., & Septiana, E. (2021). Academic Self-Efficacy Dan Takut Gagal - Mana Yang Lebih Berpengaruh Terhadap Kecurangan Akademik? Journal of Psychological Science and Profession, 5(3), 248. https://doi.org/10.24198/jpsp.v5i3.31926
  24. Putarek, V., Pavlin-Bernardić, N., & Bunoza, B. (2022). Academic Cheating: The Role of Motivational and Contextual Factors. Drustvena istrazivanja, 31(1), 89–111. https://doi.org/10.5559/di.31.1.05
  25. Rowland, S., Slade, C., Wong, K.-S., & Whiting, B. (2018). ‘Just turn to us’: The persuasive features of contract cheating websites. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(4), 652–665. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1391948
  26. Rundle, K., Curtis, G. J., & Clare, J. (2019). Why Students Do Not Engage in Contract Cheating. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2229. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02229
  27. Siswanto, F., & Durya, N. (2023). Analisis Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Diamond Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Mahasiswa Akuntansi. AKUA: Jurnal Akuntasi Dan Keuangan, 2(3), 161–170. https://doi.org/DOI:10.54259/akua.v2i3.1705
  28. Surjo, F. R., Hastuti, R., & Jessica, J. (2024). Academic Self-Efficacy Dan Kaitannya Dengan Perilaku Academic Dishonesty Pada Mahasiswa Universitas X Dalam Perkembangan Ai. Paedagogy: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan Dan Psikologi, 4(4), 331–341. https://doi.org/10.51878/paedagogy.v4i4.3799
  29. Waltzer, T., & Dahl, A. (2023). Why do students cheat? Perceptions, evaluations, and motivations. Ethics & Behavior, 33(2), 130–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2022.2026775

Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Psikologi Malahayati
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.