谁更容易近墨者黑？——马基雅维利主义的作用
Who Is More Likely to Be Polluted by Others’ Academic Dishonesty—The Moderating Effect of Machiavellism
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2022.128326, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 孙婷婷, 桑青松, 舒首立：安徽师范大学教育科学学院，安徽 芜湖
关键词: 他人作弊；作弊态度；社会损失；马基雅维利主义；Others’ Cheating； Cheating Attitude； Social Loss； Machiavellism
摘要: 作弊在日常生活中是一种随处可见的现象，甚至愈演愈烈，已从一种疾病演变为一种文化。为了探讨在他人作弊情景中个体作弊态度变化的机制，本研究通过网络问卷调查，得到758份本科生数据，经过统计分析，发现1) 社会损失在他人作弊与作弊态度之间起中介作用；2) 马基雅维利主义在他人作弊与社会损失之间起正向调节作用；3) 马基雅维利主义在社会损失与作弊态度之间起负向调节作用；4) 社会损失在他人作弊与作弊态度之间的中介作用在中等程度的马基雅维利主义水平上最高。
Abstract: Cheating is a ubiquitous phenomenon in daily life, and even intensified. It has evolved from a dis-ease to a culture. At present, research results have been published to explore the relationship between others’ cheating and their own cheating and cheating attitude. In order to further explore the relationship between others’ cheating, social loss, cheating attitude and Machiavellism, 758 undergraduate data are obtained through online questionnaire survey. After statistical analysis, it is found that 1) Social loss mediated the relationship between others’ cheating and cheating attitude; 2) Machiavellism positively moderated the relationship between others’ cheating and social loss; 3) Machiavellism negatively moderated the relationship between social loss and cheating attitude; 4) The mediating effect of social loss between others’ cheating and cheating attitude is the highest at the medium level of Machiavellism.
文章引用：孙婷婷, 桑青松, 舒首立 (2022). 谁更容易近墨者黑？——马基雅维利主义的作用. 心理学进展, 12(8), 2736-2744. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2022.128326

参考文献

[1] 陈珩(2009). 基于计划行为理论的大学生舞弊行为探析. 吉首大学学报: 社会科学版, 30(4), 159-162.
[2] 陈虹, 石静(2014). “知行关系”视角下的在校大学生道德教育研究. 内蒙古师范大学学报: 教育科学版, 27(11), 55-57.
[3] 戴维∙卡勒汉(2007). 作弊的文化. 文汇出版社.
[4] 菲利普∙津巴多(2007). 态度改变与社会影响. 人民邮电出版社.
[5] 李万福(2003). 论考试作弊的成因和基本性质. 重庆教育学院学报, 16(2), 25-27.
[6] 卢愿清, 张春娟(2008). “坦然”作弊: 大学生作弊的道德心理研究. 黑龙江高教研究, (1), 112-114.
[7] 舒首立, 桑青松, 郭永玉, 黄希庭(2018). 作弊为什么会传染? 社会损失和作弊态度的中介作用. 心理发展与教育, 34(6), 664-671.
[8] 孙世民, 李世峰(2004). 大学生考试作弊行为的博弈分析与对策. 高等农业教育, (8), 26-29.
[9] 汤舒俊, 郭永玉(2015). 中国人厚黑人格的结构及其问卷编制. 心理学探新, 35(1), 72-77.
[10] 汤舒俊, 刘亚, 郭永玉(2014). 中国人马基雅弗利主义行为影响因素的实验研究. 教育研究与实验, (4), 83-87.
[11] 王艳萍, 蒋满凤, 金锦花(2011). 大学生考试作弊现象分析及防范作弊的举措. 通化师范学院学报, 32(11), 93-96.
[12] 温忠麟, 叶宝娟(2014). 有调节的中介模型检验方法: 竞争还是替补? 心理学报, 46(5), 714-726.
[13] 张子涵(2015). 厚黑人格倾向对大学生考试作弊意向和行贿意向的影响. 硕士学位论文, 武汉: 华中师范大学.
[14] 朱月晨(2006). 研究生学术诚信问题的博弈分析. 硕士学位论文, 桂林: 广西师范大学.
[15] Akeley S. J., & Miller, A. N. (2012). The Effects of Instructor Fear Appeals and Moral Appeals on Cheating-Related Attitudes and Behavior of University Students. Ethics & Behavior, 22, 196-207.[CrossRef] 
[16] Allen, J., Fuller, D., & Luckett, M. (1998). Academic Integrity: Behaviors, Rates, and Attitudes of Business Students toward Cheating. Journal of Marketing Education, 20, 41-52.[CrossRef] 
[17] Anderman, E. M., & Won, S. (2019). Academic Cheating in Disliked Classes. Ethics & Behavior, 29, 1-22.[CrossRef] 
[18] Barbaranelli, C., Farnese, M. L., Tramontano, C., Fida, R., Ghezzi, V., Paciello, M., & Long, P. (2018). Machiavellian Ways to Academic Cheating: A Mediational and Interactional Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 695.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Christie, R., & Geis, F. L. (1970). Studies in Machiavellianism. Academic Press.
[20] Day, N. E., Hudson, D., Dobies, P. R., & Waris, R. (2011). Student or Situation? Personality and Classroom Context as Predictors of Attitudes about Business School Cheating. Social Psychology of Education, 14, 261-282.[CrossRef] 
[21] Fang, F. C., & Casadevall, A. R. T. U. R. O. (2013). Why We Cheat. Scientific American Mind, 24, 30-37.[CrossRef] 
[22] Flynn, S., Reichard, M., & Slane, S. (1987). Cheating as a Function of Task Outcome and Machiavellianism. The Journal of Psychology, 121, 423-427.[CrossRef] 
[23] Gardner, W. M., & Melvin, K. B. (1988). A Scale for Measuring Attitude toward Cheating. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 429-432.[CrossRef] 
[24] Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
[25] Jakobwitz, S., & Egan, V. (2006). The Dark Triad and Normal Personality Traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 331-339.[CrossRef] 
[26] Jordan, A. E. (2001). College Student Cheating: The Role of Motivation, Perceived Norms, Attitudes, and Knowledge of Institutional Policy. Ethics and Behavior, 11, 233-247.[CrossRef] 
[27] Jurdi, R., Hage, H. S., & Chow, H. P. (2012). What Behaviours Do Students Consider Academically Dishonest? Findings from a Survey of Canadian Undergraduate Students. Social Psychology of Education, 15, 1-23.[CrossRef] 
[28] Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. In L. C. MacLean, & W. T. Ziemba (Eds.), Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making: Part I (pp. 99-127). World Scientific Publishing.[CrossRef] 
[29] Lahno, A. M., & Serra-Garcia, M. (2015). Peer Effects in Risk Taking: Envy or Conformity? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 50, 73-95.[CrossRef] 
[30] McGuire, W. J., & Papageorgis, D. (1961). The Relative Efficacy of Various Types of Prior Belief-Defense in Producing Immunity against Persuasion. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 62, 327-337.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[31] O’Rourke, J., Barnes, J., Deaton, A., Fulks, K., Ryan, K., & Rettinger, D. A. (2010). Imitation Is the Sincerest Form of Cheating: The Influence of Direct Knowledge and Attitudes on Academic Dishonesty. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 47-64.[CrossRef] 
[32] Rettinger, D. A., & Jordan, A. E. (2005). The Relations among Religion, Motivation, and College Cheating: A Natural Experiment. Ethics & Behavior, 15, 107-129.[CrossRef] 
[33] Stone, T. H., Jawahar, I. M., & Kisamore, J. L. (2010). Predicting Academic Misconduct Intentions and Behavior Using the Theory of Planned Behavior and Personality. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 35-45.[CrossRef] 
[34] Teodorescu, D., & Andrei, T. (2009). Faculty and Peer Influ-ences on Academic Integrity: College Cheating in Romania. Higher Education, 57, 267-282.[CrossRef] 
[35] Williams, K. M., Nathanson, C., & Paulhus, D. L. (2010). Identifying and Profiling Scholastic Cheaters: Their Personality, Cognitive Ability, and Motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 293-307.[CrossRef] [PubMed]