Abstract
The review-descriptive article examines the phenomenon of “academic dishonesty” and conceptual theories of its origin. The authors consider self-efficacy theory, self-determination theory, achievement goal theory, self-determination theory, goal achievement theory, planned behaviour theory, operant conditioning theory, crime theory, neutralization theory, expected value theory, and rational choice theory. According to the self-efficacy theory of A. Bandura theory, learners who are unsure of their knowledge and skills, irrespective of their previous achievements, cheat. The self-determination theory of E.L. Deci and R.M. Ryan sense of unmet basic psychological needs for competence, autonomy, and connectedness to others increases the likelihood of academic fraud. J.G. Nicholls’ goal attainment theory determines that learners who seek to avoid demonstrating poor performance are more likely to commit academic fraud. Within I. Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour the intention to act dishonestly can be explained by the student’s own attitude to academic dishonesty, the subjective norms adopted in the educational environment in which he or she is placed and the subjective assessment of the ease of committing dishonest acts. Operant conditioning theory determines that if an act (i.e. academic fraud) has been performed successfully, it is more likely to be repeated. In the theory of crime, academic fraud is seen as dishonest behaviour by learners during learning activities. Factors influencing the prevalence and frequency of dishonest behaviour of learners have been identified, such as low self-control, the possibility of committing academic fraud, and the presence of positive attitudes towards dishonest behaviour. According to the neutralization theory of G.M. Sykes, and D. Matza dishonest practices of learners are explained by the fact that they do not consider them as cheating but as morally acceptable phenomena. G.S. Becker’s expectation-value theory and rational choice theory view academic dishonesty as a rational and weighted decision made by students themselves, i.e., in terms of possible costs and benefits to them (economic approach).