Manajemen | Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji joeb.82.3.146-158

Journal of Education for Business

ISSN: 0883-2323 (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vjeb20

A Comparative Study of Ethical Beliefs of Master
of Business Administration Students in the United
States With Those In Hong Kong
Mohammed Rawwas , Ziad Swaidan & Hans Isakson
To cite this article: Mohammed Rawwas , Ziad Swaidan & Hans Isakson (2007) A Comparative
Study of Ethical Beliefs of Master of Business Administration Students in the United States
With Those In Hong Kong, Journal of Education for Business, 82:3, 146-158, DOI: 10.3200/
JOEB.82.3.146-158
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOEB.82.3.146-158

Published online: 07 Aug 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 39

View related articles

Citing articles: 7 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=vjeb20
Download by: [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji]

Date: 11 January 2016, At: 23:23

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

A Comparative Study of Ethical Beliefs of
Master of Business Administration
Students in the United States With Those
In Hong Kong
MOHAMMED RAWWAS
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA
CEDAR FALLS, IOWA

ZIAD SWAIDAN

UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON-VICTORIA
VICTORIA, TEXAS

HANS ISAKSON
UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN IOWA
CEDAR FALLS, IOWA

ABSTRACT. In this article, the authors

A

emic dishonesty of MBA students in two
distinct cultures, the United States and
Hong Kong. We hope that the results
will assist faculty to develop better
teaching curriculum that might improve
the ethical beliefs of MBA students.
As students continue to face various
sources of pressure from family, potential employers, and others to achieve
higher grades and as the economic situation continues to hold fewer employment prospects for college graduates,

academic dishonesty is likely to continue to be a global issue of concern
specifically in highly populated regions,
such as Hong Kong. Academic dishonesty, which “consists of any deliberate
attempt to falsify, fabricate or otherwise
tamper with data, information, records,
or any other material that is relevant to
the student’s participation in any course,
laboratory, or other academic exercise
or function” (San Joaquin Delta College, 2003, p.1), is a growing problem
and concern for instructors and administrators in higher education (Rawwas,
Al-Khatib, & Vitell, 2004). Results of a
U.S. governmental research study conducted by the Center for Academic
Integrity (2000) heightened concern
because the researchers found that the
percentage of students who admitted to
some cheating in 1963 (11%) had dramatically increased to 75% by 1999.
The importance of cross-cultural studies in which researchers investigate busi-

investigated personal beliefs and values and
opportunism variables that might contribute

to the academic dishonesty of American and
Hong Kong master of business administration (MBA) students. They also compared
American and Hong Kong MBA students
with respect to their personal beliefs and values, opportunism, and academic dishonesty
variables. Results showed that American
MBA students who were idealistic, theistic,
intolerant, and not opportunistic were likely
to behave ethically. Hong Kong MBA students who were idealistic, intolerant, positive, and not opportunistic tended to act
morally. Hong Kong students tended to be
less theistic, more tolerant, more detached,
more negatively oriented, more relativistic,
less achievement-oriented, and more humanistic-oriented than were their American
counterparts.
Key words: academic dishonesty, Hong
Kong students, masters of business administration (MBA)
Copyright © 2007 Heldref Publications

146

Journal of Education for Business

s a result of the corporate scandals involving Enron, WorldCom,
Tyco, Health-South, Martha Stewart,
and the Wall Street analysts and the
firms that supported them, educators
have developed a growing concern
about the character of today’s master of
business administration (MBA) students’ ethical beliefs, primarily because
the students are tomorrow’s business
leaders (Merritt, 2004). Harris and Sutton (1995) previously found that MBA
students were more tolerant of behaviors related to “fraud” and “self-interest” than were Fortune 1,000 executives. And recently, the Chronicle of
Higher Education referred to Stearns
and Borna’s (1998) study in which they
reported that inmates were as ethical as
MBA students, and sometimes more
laudable, when faced with ethical business dilemmas. To have a somewhat
comprehensive understanding of the
ethical beliefs of MBA students, it
would be beneficial to compare them
with other MBA students in an industrial region such as Hong Kong. Students

in industrial countries or regions are
expected to have similar standards, but
differences in cultures may have some
impact on their ethical behaviors.
Purpose
Our purpose in this study was to identify the determinants of and differences
between the ethical beliefs toward acad-

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

ness students’ ethical differences has also
been on the rise, and several researchers
have answered the call for this research
(Husted, Dozier, McMahon, & Kattan,
1996; Kennedy & Lawton, 1996; Lysonski & Gaidis, 1991; Okleshen & Hoyt,
1996; Whipple & Swords, 1992). Lysonski and Gaidis found that the reactions of
American, Danish, and New Zealand
business undergraduate students to ethical dilemmas were similar. However,
other researchers (Husted et al.; Kennedy
& Lawton, 1996; Okleshen & Hoyt,

1996; Whipple & Swords, 1992) reported ethical differences among students of
various cultures in their studies. Whipple
and Swords stated that American students were more critical than were
British students regarding confidentiality, research integrity, and marketing mix
issues. Okleshen and Hoyt found that
American students were less tolerant of
fraud, coercion, and self-interest than
were New Zealand students. Kennedy
and Lawton revealed that the levels of
alienation of Ukrainian students were
high and their levels of religiousness
were low relative to those of the U.S. students. Their results also associated the
willingness to engage in unethical business practices with higher levels of alienation and lower levels of religiousness.
Finally, Husted et al. (1996) contrasted
the ethical beliefs of business MBA students from the United States, Mexico,
and Spain and found that the U.S. students used postconventional level reasoning more than did their Mexican or
Spanish counterparts.
Although ethical beliefs of undergraduate and MBA students have been
of interest to researchers, very little is
known about the academic dishonesty

of MBA students in the United States or
in a foreign market, such as Hong Kong.
Furthermore, academic dishonesty
among today’s MBA students may have
far-reaching effects on their future ethical behavior and on international trade.
Kung (1997) argued that ethics played
an indispensable role in the process of
globalization. In addition, researchers
have considered academic dishonesty to
be the equivalent of business wrongdoing (Burton & Near, 1995). The rationale is that cheating on a paper is the
college equivalent to misreporting time
worked.

The core of both activities is basically to gain an additional benefit for work
not completed. An MBA student
exchanges bogus papers for higher
grades in much the same way a businessperson exchanges fake reports for a
promotion.
Our purpose in the present study is
twofold: (a) to investigate several personal beliefs and values and opportunism variables that might contribute

to the academic dishonesty of American
and Hong Kong MBA students and (b)
to compare American and Hong Kong
MBA students with respect to their personal beliefs and values, opportunism,
and academic dishonesty variables.
Finally, we will provide recommendations for improving MBA curriculum
and curbing academic dishonesty in the
United States and Hong Kong.

ferences influenced cultural differences
in general (Rawwas, 2001; Rawwas et
al., 2004; Rawwas & Isakson, 2000).

Hypotheses

Tolerance and Intolerance of
Misconduct

Hofstede (1984, 1997) found that
societies differed along four cultural

dimensions: (a) power distance (divisions between people who have wealth
and power and those who do not), (b)
uncertainty avoidance (relying on rules
and procedures designed to limit risk
and uncertainty), (c) individualism
(valuing a high degree of freedom and
independence), and (d) masculinity
(valuing aggressiveness, competition,
and ambition) or femininity (e.g., cherishing relationships, and nurturing).
Hofstede found many collectivist cultures, such as that found in Hong Kong,
to be (a) high on power distance (maintaining deep divisions), (b) high on
uncertainty avoidance, (c) low on individualism (valuing loyalty to family,
friends, and the organization more than
freedom and independence), and (d)
low on masculinity.
In contrast, Hofstede (1984, 1997)
found many individualist cultures, such
as that of the United States, to be (a) low
on power distance (maintaining broad
distribution of wealth and power), (b)

low on uncertainty avoidance (exhibiting tolerance for abnormal ideas and
behaviors), (c) high on individualism
(valuing a high degree of freedom and
independence), and (d) high on masculinity (rewarding aggressiveness and
competition). In previous research, we
and our colleagues found that those dif-

Personal Beliefs and Values
Results of several studies (Rawwas et
al., 2004; Rawwas & Isakson, 2000;
Roig & Ballew, 1994) also indicated
personal values were determinants of
academic dishonesty. For example,
Roig and Ballew believed that the decision to cheat or not to cheat inherently
lay within the individual’s personal
value system. Furthermore, Rawwas et
al., and Rawwas and Isakson found that
students’ academic dishonesty practices
could be partially explained by several
personal beliefs and values variables,
such as tolerance, achievement, idealism, and relativism.

Tolerant people have liberal viewpoints and reject absolute truths. However, intolerant people have strict outlooks
and believe in one true system of standards for social conduct. Researchers
(Hofstede, 1984; Singh, 1990) found
intolerant people endorsed conformity
and relationships more than independence and risk. Conversely, tolerant people did not fear the future, accepted risk
easily (Hofstede, 1984; Kale, 1991; Kale
& Barnes, 1992), severed existing relationships (Kale & Barnes), and tolerated
blunders because the cost of wrongdoing
was relatively low in such cultures
(Doney, Cannon, & Mullen, 1998).
Although both the U.S. and Hong
Kong cultures were characterized by
Hofstede (1984) as low in uncertainty
avoidance, the Hong Kong culture had a
lower score. Consequently, Hong Kong
individuals might tolerate unethical
practices more than U.S. individuals
might. Evidence of this conjecture
might be viewed with respect to the
abuse of software rights in both cultures: U.S. firms lost only $2.8 million
from software rights abuse, whereas its
practice in Hong Kong caused multinational corporations to lose $88.6 million
(Moores & Dhillon, 2000). Roig and
Neaman (1994) found a positive relationship between intolerance of wrongdoing and ethical decision making, and
January/February 2007

147

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

a negative association between tolerance of misconduct and ethical decision
making.
In other studies, researchers found
that tolerance was a positive determinant of academic dishonesty (Rawwas
et al., 2004) and that people of collectivist cultures, such as the Polish, had a
much more tolerant view of academic
dishonesty than did the U.S. students
(Ashworth & Bannister, 1997; Lupton,
Chapman, & Weiss, 2000; Roberts &
Toombs, 1993; Roig & Ballew, 1994).
Therefore, we developed the following
hypotheses:
H1a: Intolerance of academic dishonesty
will be negatively associated with academic dishonesty practices. However, tolerance of academic dishonesty will have the
opposite effect.
H1b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more tolerant of academic dishonesty
than will the U.S. MBA students.

Achievement and Experience
Achievement-oriented people tend to
value goal accomplishment, success,
and the constructive use of time, whereas experience-oriented individuals are
likely to be relaxed and to live for the
moment (Foltz & Miller, 1994). Both
the U.S. and Hong Kong cultures are
characterized as masculine, in which
individual decision-making, competitiveness, assertiveness, and the accrual
of wealth and belongings are encouraged (Hofstede, 1984), and time is
viewed as a commodity to be saved,
scheduled, and managed (Schuster &
Copeland, 1996).
In masculine cultures, people believe
that many ethical conflicts can be
solved without standard rules, and principles and regulations should only be
formulated in case of absolute necessity
(Hofstede, 1984; Rawwas, 2001). Their
performance evaluation is based on
individual achievement (Ueno &
Sekaran, 1992), and individual brilliance is admired and idolized (Kale,
1991). People within these cultures
often pride themselves on efficiency and
place a high price on success.
Franklyn-Stokes and Newstead
(1995) found that individuals seeking
success in such cultures might identify
goals but use different means to achieve
them. Those who worked hard to feel
148

Journal of Education for Business

gratified rather than to obtain a mere
reward were less likely to cheat (Foltz &
Miller, 1994). Results from several
studies indicated that the most common
justifications given for practicing academic dishonesty included the time pressures, the desire for better grades, and
the
aspiration
of
achievement
(Franklyn-Stokes & Newstead; Payne &
Nantz, 1994; Roig & Ballew, 1994).
In a recent study, Harding (2004) surveyed 650 students from 12 universities
and found that 75% of students admitted
to taking part in academic dishonesty
during their academic career. Their
motivation to be engaged in cheating is
driven by the perceived need to achieve
higher grades and be socially accepted.
Nowell and Laufer (1997) also found
that achieving higher grades was the
most important factor in leading students to engage in academic dishonesty.
They found that students who achieved
high grades in the class had no need to
cheat and did not do so. Students who
performed poorly in class were significantly more likely to cheat to alter their
scores on the exams (Nowell & Laufer)
and to possibly acquire a better job offer
upon graduation (Bunn, Caudill, &
Gropper, 1992). Although Hofstede
(1984) classified both the U.S. and
Hong Kong cultures as masculine, the
United States scored higher on masculinity than did Hong Kong. Therefore,
we developed the following hypotheses:
H2a: Achievement will be positively associated with academic dishonesty practices; however, experience will have a
negative effect.
H2b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more experience-oriented than will U.S.
MBA students, and U.S. MBA students
will be more achievement-oriented than
will Hong Kong MBA students.

Idealism and Relativism
Forsyth (1980) has identified two
major categories of moral philosophy:
idealism and relativism. Although idealism focuses on the specific actions or
behaviors of the individual, relativism
concentrates on the consequences of
actions or behaviors. In other words,
idealists believe that the inherent goodness or badness of an action should
allow one to determine the ethical
course of action. However, relativists

judge an act as right only if it produces
for all people a greater balance of positive consequences than do other available alternatives.
In Hong Kong, culture is based on
Confucian values in which one ideally
should find one’s own way to become a
healthy individual with an ultimate
commitment to concern for society
(Liu, 1998). Empirical results indicated
that people from Hong Kong possess
strong Confucian values (Hofstede,
1997; Hofstede & Bond, 1988) and that
Confucianism and individualism were
negatively related (Yeh & Lawrence,
1995). Newstead (1996) cited idealism
as an important factor explaining academic dishonesty.
In studying a mainland Chinese sample, Rawwas et al. (2004) found that
idealism was a negative determinant of
academic dishonesty. Idealists have a
strong belief that morality will guide a
person’s actions. Researchers have
found that individuals who scored high
on idealism also judged academic dishonesty harshly (Forsyth, 1980, 1981,
1985), had a great ethic of caring
(Forsyth, Nye, & Kelly, 1988), and
scored low on Machiavellianism (Leary,
Knight, & Barnes, 1986). In another
study, Barnett, Bass, and Brown (1996)
found that idealistic individuals were
more likely to report a peer who was
engaged in academic dishonesty than
were relativistic individuals.
In Western culture, Aristotle’s
(McGee, 1992) theory of ethics noted
that the goal of the moral life is the selfperfection of the individual human
being. To attain this goal, one should
use practical reason to determine what
ought to be done in a concrete situation.
Practical reason is the use of judgment,
rather than formalized rules, by which
an individual determines the morality of
a real situation. This moral judgment
can vary from person to person, and certain judgments can have larger roles in
the lives of some persons than they do in
others (McGee).
According to Hofstede (1984, 1997),
a combination of low uncertainty avoidance and high individualism characterized many European and American
entrepreneurs. A culture of masculine
risk-takers emphasizes earnings, competition, advancement, challenge, and

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

individual decision making. In a situation with an ethical component, individuals in these cultures compare all possible options and select the one that
promises the best result (i.e., relativism;
Hofstede, 1997). In a poll of 5,000
American students, the majority
responded that the greatest authority in
matters of truth was “their gut instinct,
whatever feels right, whatever turns
them on, whatever is relative, negotiable” (Kidder, 1992, p. 10).
Leary et al. (1986) also found that
relativistic individuals scored high on
Machiavellianism.
Machiavellianism was typically associated with poor concern for morality,
and highly Machiavellian individuals
were thought to reason differently about
ethical issues than were non-Machiavellian individuals (Christie & Geis, 1970;
Leary et al., 1986). Forsyth and Nye
(1990) found that relativistic individuals
also violated societal norms for personal gain more than nonrelativistic individuals did. This suggested that relativistic individuals might be more likely
to excuse academic dishonesty practices
that were self-beneficial than might
nonrelativistic individuals (Barnett,
Bass, & Brown, 1996). In studying the
ethical beliefs of American students,
Rawwas and Isakson (2000) found relativism was a positive determinant of
academic dishonesty. Therefore, we
hypothesized that
H3a: Idealism will be negatively associated with academic dishonesty practices;
however, relativism will have the opposite
effect.
H3b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more idealistic than will U.S. MBA students, and Hong Kong MBA students will
be less relativistic than will U.S. MBA
students.

Positivism and Negativism
Positive people are optimistic and
believe that things will get better, whereas negative individuals are pessimistic
and doubtful about the future. Shainess
(1993) found that individuals with a positive self-concept had a tendency to
develop an ethical sense and to recognize
the role of conscience in life. However,
Love and Simmons (1998) found that
individuals with negative personal attitudes were associated with misconduct.

In Hong Kong, two major factors
contributed to negativism: the Asian
economic crisis of July, 1997 ( Alon &
Kellerman, 1999; Roubini, 1999), and
the emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS; U.S. Department of State, 2004). Hong Kong
experienced deflation from November
1998 to July 2004, and property prices
had fallen 66% in mid 2003 from their
peak in 1997 (U.S. Department of
State). Throughout that time, Hong
Kong witnessed declining currency
values, large layoffs, shrinking gross
domestic products, and rising prices of
staple items. Whereas Hong Kong
ideals of hard work, respect for learning, and collectivism brought them
unparalleled growth, many analysts
believe that high power distance and
the unquestionable authority of officials led to collusion, lack of transparency, corruption, and a boost to the
“quanxi” system—a network of contacts that an individual calls upon
when something needs to be done and
through which he or she can exert
influence on behalf of another
(Wikipedia, 2006).
These prevailing factors in Hong
Kong promoted pessimism and a negative outlook (Alon & Kellerman, 1999).
In general, individual attitudes undoubtedly influence behavior, as researchers
have conceptualized and tested in several models of ethical behavior (Ferrell &
Gresham, 1985; Hunt & Vitell, 1993;
Shaw & Clarke, 1999; Vitell, Singhapakdi, & Thomas, 2001). Research
results revealed that those who scored
high on positivism were less likely to
engage in unethical practices, such as
academic dishonesty, than were those
who scored low on positivism (Vitell &
Muncy, 1992).
In studying the ethical beliefs of
American students, Rawwas et al. (2004)
found that positivism was a negative
determinant and negativism was a positive determinant of academic dishonesty.
Therefore, we hypothesize that:
H4a: Positivism will be negatively associated with academic dishonesty practices.
However, negativism will have the opposite effect.
H4b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more negative than will U.S. MBA students, and U.S. MBA students will be

more positive than will Hong Kong MBA
students.

Behaviorism and Humanism
Behaviorist-oriented individuals tend
to put considerable trust in science as a
means of understanding and dealing
with people. Behaviorists see people as
neutral at birth, having the potential to
learn to be either good or bad. Society,
as seen by behaviorists, can teach
appropriate or inappropriate behavior to
its children. Behaviorists discount ideas
related to innate and intangible topics,
such as instincts, consciousness, or soul.
Humanists, however, believe people
possess a positive inborn drive to grow
and improve. Instead of being born neutral, humans are born basically good,
and society should build their inherent
tendency to remain healthy and moral.
Mencius, an itinerant Chinese
philosopher and sage, argued that
human beings are born with an innate
moral sense and that the goal of honorable cultivation is to maintain one’s
innate morality (Liu, 1998). According
to Mencius, humanity, righteousness,
and propriety are not drilled into people
from outside; they originally have them
within them. If one does something
wicked, it is due to adverse environmental influences (Liu). Humanists frown
upon academic dishonesty because it is
evil and not an inherent characteristic of
humans (Rawwas et al., 2004).
Evidence from anthropology, psychology, and political science confirms
that individualistic and masculine societies believe in behaviorism (Hofstede,
1984), and the large degree of freedom
to learn to be either good or bad does little to restrict variance in human behavior and discounts the price for mischief
(Doney, Cannon, & Mullen, 1998).
Because individualist societies accept
great range in peoples’ behaviors (Kale
& McIntyre, 1991), the costs for engaging in wrongdoing, such as academic
dishonesty, do not appear to be substantial (Hofstede, 1984).
The individualism or collectivism
dimensions influence the likelihood that
societies will act opportunistically
(Doney et al., 1998). The possibility that
collectivists will engage in misconduct
is low because collectivists hold group
values and beliefs and seek affiliated
January/February 2007

149

interests (Hofstede 1984; Singh 1990).
Self-serving behaviors, such as academic dishonesty practices, are unlikely
because of the high cost of social sanctions; people who violate in-group
norms may be ostracized by the group
(Earley, 1989; Ueno & Sekaran, 1992).
Therefore, we posed the following
hypotheses:

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

H5a: Humanism will be negatively associated with academic dishonesty practices;
however, behaviorism will have the opposite effect.
H5b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more humanistic-oriented than will U.S.
MBA students, and U.S. MBA students
will be more behaviorist-oriented than
will Hong Kong MBA students.

Detachment and Involvement
According to Foltz and Miller (1994),
detached people tend to keep a distance
from others, avoiding emotional risk.
However, attached or involved people
tend to feel it is important to make commitments and be associated with others.
Selmer (1998) further reported that in
collective societies, such as in Hong
Kong, people have a strong sense of
group identification. From a very young
age, Hong Kong children are taught the
importance of loyalty and obedience.
The family unit teaches the children to
restrain their individuality and maintain
a harmonious atmosphere (i.e., be
attached to the group).
The social order of the family also
serves as a prototype for conduct in all
other Hong Kong organizations. Individuals subordinate themselves to the
group, the community, and the state.
Subordinates are expected to be loyal
without question. Any misconduct by an
individual is the responsibility of the
group (Selmer, 1998). Because people
in collectivist societies maintain conformity and seek collective interests, the
likelihood that they will engage in
opportunistic behavior is low (Hofstede,
1984; Singh, 1990).
By contrast, people in individualistic
societies, such as the United States, often
define themselves as standing out from
the group (i.e., being detached), emphasizing identity, reward, and status (Steidlmeier, 1999). The theory of motivation
asserts that individuals should seek to
maximize their own pleasure (Grassian,
150

Journal of Education for Business

1981). Other pleasures are important
only if they are seen as means to the satisfaction of one’s own enjoyment (Grassian). Roig and Neaman (1994) found
indications that the attitudes underlying
academic dishonesty also seem to be
associated with detachment.
Student detachment as regarded by
Pruden, Shuptrine, and Longman
(1974) includes a normlessness factor
that represents an attitude in which
social norms are no longer considered to
be effective as rules for behavior. Thus,
detached students are not likely to
employ norms to guide their behavior,
and therefore, one might expect that
these students would find academic dishonesty practices to be acceptable (i.e.,
student detachment would be positively
related to academic dishonesty). This
was supported in Rawwas et al.’s (2004)
study in which they found detachment
to be a positive determinant of receiving
and abetting academic dishonesty.
In addition, Vitell and Muncy (1992)
found that detached individuals had a
negative attitude toward institutions,
such as universities, and were not sensitive to ethical issues. In a more recent
study, Vitell, Singhapadki, and Thomas
(2001) found individual detachment to
be associated negatively with one’s
ethical beliefs. The theoretical reasoning is that if social norms are no longer
effective rules for behavior, then one
might expect a student’s ethical beliefs
to be adversely affected as well. Therefore, we formulated the following
hypotheses:
H6a: Involvement will be negatively associated with academic dishonesty practices; however, detachment will have the
opposite effect.
H6b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more involved than will U.S. MBA students, and U.S. MBA students will be
more detached than will Hong Kong
MBA students.

Theism and Nontheism
Theistic-oriented people believe in
the existence of God, or a supreme
being, whereas nontheistic-oriented
people share a secular outlook on
behavior. Religion is a powerful ethical voice in contemporary life. From a
religious point of view, the deity’s laws
are absolutes that must shape the

whole of one’s life, including work.
Faith, rather than reason, intuition, or
secular knowledge, provides the foundation for a moral life built on religion.
Giorgi and Marsh (1990) indicated that
religion and the level of religious fervor of individuals had a positive effect
on their ethics. McCabe and Trevino
(1993) found that unethical behavior
was negatively related to the severity
of penalties.
Singhapakdi, Marta, Rallapalli, and
Rao (2000) reported that religiousness
partly explained the insights and intentions of marketers toward an ethical
dilemma. Likewise, Kennedy and Lawton (1998) found a negative relationship
between religiousness and willingness
to behave unethically. In addition,
researchers found that students at a religiously affiliated university were far
less willing to engage in unethical
behavior than were students at an unaffiliated university (Roberts & Rabinowitz, 1992). In spite of the flourish of
Buddhism, Taoism, and other religions
in Hong Kong during the roughly 150
years of British colonialism, the influx
of immigrants from mainland China has
produced a good number of nontheistic
people. Although an overwhelming
majority of Americans (85%) categorized themselves as religious (“Psalm
pilots,” 2001), only 43% of Hong Kong
individuals classified themselves as religious (U.S. Department of State, 2004).
Therefore, we formulated the following
hypotheses:
H7a: Theism will be negatively associated
with academic dishonesty practices.
However, nontheism will be positively
associated with academic dishonesty.
H7b: U.S. MBA students will be more
theistic than will Hong Kong MBA students.

Opportunism
Williamson (1975) defined opportunism as “self-interest seeking with
guile” (p. 6). For example, an official
who conceals information or provides
favoritism for the sake of self-enhancement is taking advantage of opportunism. Temptation can even sway those
with strong personal ethics. Malinowski
and Smith (1985) reported lower incidents of cheating among those who possessed higher moral reasoning. Howev-

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

er, this group was inclined to behave
unethically when the temptation was
great. Newstead et al. (1996) found
indications that people who cheat neutralize their behavior by blaming it on
the situation rather than on themselves.
Hofstede’s (1984) power distance
dimension addressed ideological orientations and behavioral adaptations to
authority. Opportunism may be less
likely in low power distance cultures
(such as the United States), which tend
toward a natural sharing of power and
more participative decision making. In
such cultures, people are more willing
to consult with others and moderate the
use of power (Kale & McIntyre, 1991).
However, the use of power and coercion
are frequent occurrences in high power
cultures (such as Hong Kong; Kale &
McIntyre, 1991). John (1984) showed
empirically that perceptions of
increased centralization, controls, and
coercion led to more opportunism, and
oppressed individuals sought more
opportunistic behavior to alleviate
oppression. On the basis of the previous
analysis, we developed two hypotheses:
H8a: Opportunism will be positively associated with academic dishonesty practices.
H8b: Hong Kong MBA students will be
more opportunistic than will U.S. MBA
students.

METHOD
Research Setting
We selected business college students
who were taking MBA marketing classes
as subjects for this study. This choice was
motivated by several reasons. Foremost,
cheating in college is a highly appropriate form of unethical behavior to study
because students’ involvement in cheating, such as communicating answers,
peeping, using crib notes or formulas
during exams, or submitting a forged
paper are very prevalent. Second, previous researchers used academic dishonesty as a type of business organizational
wrongdoing (e.g., Burton & Near, 1995).
Finally, future business leaders will come
from the ranks of today’s MBA students.
Data
Self-administered questionnaires
were distributed to two groups of U.S.

and Hong Kong MBA students to identify the determinants of and differences between their attitudes toward
various forms of academic dishonesty
in the fall 2003 semester. The first
group consisted of 288 students in 9
MBA marketing classes of a public
university in the United States. The
second group consisted of 140 students
in five MBA marketing classes in a
Hong Kong university. All of the MBA
students completed English versions of
the questionnaires during the first portion of a class period (the language of
instruction in Hong Kong was English). All responses were anonymous.
The survey (see Appendix) included
questions related to various forms of

academic dishonesty, personal values
and beliefs, opportunism, and demographics.
Student Attitudes Toward Various
Forms of Academic Dishonesty
(Factors 1 & 2)
Student attitudes toward cheating were
measured using factor analysis of 13 situations that resulted in two factors
(“receiving and abetting academic dishonesty” and “getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty”) involving various forms of cheating (see Table
1). This scale was adopted from Rawwas
and Isakson (2000), and factor labels
were adopted from Rawwas et al. (2004).

TABLE 1. Factor Analysis Results and Reliabilities of American and Hong
Kong Master of Business Administration (MBA) Samples

Variable
Factor 1: Receiving and abetting
academic dishonesty
1. Communicating answers (e.g., whisper,
give sign language) to a friend during
a test.
2. “Hacking” your way into the university’s
computer system to change your grade.
3. Hiring someone or having a friend take
a test for you in a very large class.
4. Peeping at your neighbor's exam during
the test.
5. Using unauthorized “crib notes” during
an exam.
6. Turning in a term paper that you
purchased or borrowed from someone else.
Factor 2: Getting involved in questionable
academic dishonesty activities
1. Receiving extra credit because the
instructor likes you.
2. Receiving favoritism as a result of
being a student athlete or member of a
campus organization.
3. Receiving a higher grade through the
influence of a family or personal
connection.
4. Being allowed to perform extra work,
which is not assigned to all class
members, to improve your grade.
5. Brown-nosing your professors.
6. Contributing little to group work and
projects, yet still receiving the same
credit and grade as the other members.
7. Having access to old exams in a
particular course to which other students
do not have access.

U.S. Sample
Factor
Rel.
loading
α

H.K. Sample
Factor
Rel.
loading
α

.77

.70

.65

.71

.64

.64

.62

.51

.61

.52

.59

.63

.53

.77
.72

.70

.70

.61

.60

.78

.59

.70

.59
.55

.55
.71

.52

.65

.50

.62

January/February 2007

151

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

We asked the participants to indicate
their approval of each activity on a Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly
believe that it is wrong) to 5 (strongly
believe that it is not wrong). Factor
analysis with varimax rotation identified
two significant dimensions (see Table 1).
According to Peterson (1994) and Nunnally (1978), the reliabilities of the
dimensions were generally acceptable (α
≥ .65) for both groups (see α in Table 1).
Both dimensions, labeled as “receiving
and abetting academic dishonesty” and
“getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities,” were treated
as dependent variables.
The most significant characteristics
of the first dimension, “receiving and
abetting academic dishonesty” (see
items in Table 1), were almost universally perceived as unethical and initiated by the student (e.g., using unauthorized “crib notes” during an exam).
The second dimension, “getting
involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities” (see items in Table
1), occurred when students were
engaged in dubious situations, such as
“receiving extra credit because the
instructor likes you.”
Personal Beliefs and Values
Eight constructs (a) tolerance versus
intolerance, (b) achievement versus
experience, (c) negativism versus positivism, (d) behaviorism versus humanism, (e) detachment versus involvement, and (f) nontheism versus theism
(included in Tables 2 and 4), (g) idealism, and (h) relativism (included in
Table 4; see Forsyth [1980] for individual items) were used to measure the
beliefs and values of students about
life and relations with other people.
The first six measures were adopted
from the Beliefs and Values Questionnaire (BVQ) used by Foltz and Miller
(1994). Each scale was measured by
using a formula. For instance, Scale I
measured a tolerance versus intolerance orientation by adding 10 to total
scores of two tolerance items minus
total scores of two intolerance items.
The last two constructs were the predominant ethical ideology (idealism
and relativism) of the Ethics Position
Questionnaire (EPQ) used by Forsyth
152

Journal of Education for Business

(1980). Cronbach alphas for the EPQ
scales were > .80 for both groups.
Respondents were asked to indicate
their agreement or disagreement with
each item for all aforementioned
dimensions using a 5-point Likert scale
(1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly
agree). All of the eight dimensions
were treated as independent variables.
To check the reliability of our results,
we have compared the means of personal beliefs and values of Foltz and
Miller’s (1994) national study with
those of our study. Table 2 shows the
means of the beliefs and values of both
studied samples and the national sample of Foltz and Miller. Our U.S. sample seemed to benchmark reasonably

well against the U.S. national sample of
Foltz and Miller.
Opportunism
The opportunism construct included
situations in which students were
engaged in questionable practices that
provided rewards, such as “taking
advantage of answers you inadvertently
saw on another student’s exam” (see
Table 3). This scale was also adopted
from Rawwas and Isakson (2000). Subjects were asked to indicate their
approval of each activity on a standard
Likert scale (1 = strongly believe that it
is wrong, 5 = strongly believe that it is
not wrong). This dimension was also
treated as an independent variable.

TABLE 2. Descriptive Statistics of Beliefs and Values of American and
Hong Kong Master in Business Administration (MBA) Students
Foltz &
Miller’s
M
Theistic or nontheistica
Achievement or experienceb
Detachment or involvementc
Tolerance or intoleranced
Behaviorism or humanisme
Positive or negativef

10
11
6
10
7
10

U.S. sample
M
SD
13.13
10.28
7.38
9.51
8.16
11.45

3.50
1.72
2.14
1.91
2.19
2.36

H.K. sample
M
SD
10.92
9.76
9.21
10.69
7.28
10.49

3.71
1.76
1.95
1.83
2.02
2.27

Note. Each scale was measured by using a formula. For example, Scale I measured a tolerance versus intolerance orientation by adding 10 to total scores of two tolerance items minus total scores
of two intolerance items. Data in Column 2 are from Appendix C by G. J. Foltz and N. Miller,
1994, in “Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases,” (pp. 326–328). aHigher scores
indicate a conventional religious outlook and low scores reflect a secular outlook. bHigh scores
characterize achievement-oriented individuals whereas low scores describe experience-oriented
individuals. cHigh scores illustrate detached people whereas low scores characterize involved people. dHigh scorers are tolerant while low scorers are intolerant. eThe high scorer tends to be behaviorism-oriented whereas the low scorer tends to be humanism-oriented. fThe high scorer is positive whereas the low scorer is negative.

TABLE 3. Factor Analysis Results and Reliabilities of Opportunism for
the American and Hong Kong MBA Samples

Independent variable
Factor 3: Opportunism
Overhearing answers to exam
questions when your neighbor
whispers to another student.
Taking advantage of answers you
inadvertently saw on another
student exam.

U.S. Sample
Factor
Reliability
loading
sample

H.K. Sample
Factor Reliability
loading
sample

.70

.72

.73

.76

.58

.61

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

Statistical Analysis
We examined the personal beliefs and
values of the students as well as opportunism as determinants of the two
dimensions of Rawwas and Isakson
(2000). Academic Dishonesty Scale
(“receiving and abetting academic dishonesty” and “getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities”) using stepwise multiple
regression analyses. We assumed the
relationship between the two dimensions and the independent variables,
personal beliefs and values and opportunism, to be linear as follows:
Fi = αi + βI Xij + εij
where, Fi represented a vector of the
two attitudes toward cheating, Xij represented a vector of the nine independent
variables for each of the two attitudes,
and εij represents the error term that was
assumed to have a multivariate normal
distribution. The parameters αi and βi
were estimated from the data using the
stepwise ordinary least squares techniques. To determine whether ethical
beliefs of Hong Kong and American
MBA students differed with respect to
the variables of interest, we used multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
and multiple discriminant analysis
(MDA).

significantly between the groups. We
will discuss specific findings related to
the hypotheses later.

ican group, tolerance (H1a) was a positive determinant of receiving and abetting academic dishonesty, and for the
Hong Kong group, it was a positive
determinant of getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities.
For the American group, idealism (H3a)
was a negative determinant of only getting involved in questionable academic
dishonesty activities, but for Hong

Hypotheses1a–8a
Multiple regression analyses provided partial support for H1a–8a. We conducted these for each separate subsample (U.S. and Hong Kong; see Tables 4
and 5). They revealed that for the Amer-

TABLE 4. Multiple Regression of Beliefs and Values, Individual
Characteristic, Opportunism, and Ethical Practices of American Master
of Business Administration (MBA) Students
Variable

B

β

t

p

Receiving and abetting academic dishonesty
Tolerance
Opportunism
(constant)
F(df = 3)
Significant F
R2

.047
.255
.628
41.215
.000
.318

.198
.480

3.851
3.638
3.638

.000
.000
.000

Getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities
Theism
Idealism
Opportunism
(constant)
F(df = 3)
Significant F
R2

–.022
–.284
.243
2.190
25.834
.000
.223

–.121
–.298
.318

–2.230
–5.456
5.839
8.232

.027
.000
.000
.000

RESULTS
Table 4 shows the results of the
regression analyses for the American
sample, and Table 5 shows the results
for the Hong Kong sample. The F-statistic of each regression and the coefficient of each independent variable were
statistically significant. Independent
variables that did not appear in the
regressions for both groups (Tables 4
and 5) were eliminated by the stepwise
regression technique because of their
poor contribution to the explanatory
power of the regressions.
Table 6 shows a summary of the
MANOVA and MDA results for the
American and Hong Kong groups. The
multivariate result was significant with
high statistical power allowing for the
subsequent univariate interpretation of
the results. Of the 11 variables, 9 criterion variables (7 values and beliefs and
2 ethical behaviors variables) differed

TABLE 5. Multiple Regression of Beliefs and Values, Individual Characteristic, Opportunism and Ethical Practices of Hong Kong Master in
Business Administration (MBA) Students
Variable

B

β

t

p

Receiving and abetting academic dishonesty
Positivism
Idealism
Opportunism
(constant)
F(df = 2)
Significant F
R2

–.049
–.268
.251
2.515
17.936
.000
.352

–.235
–.317
.374
5.229

–2.429
–3.131
3.650
.000

.018
.003
.001

Getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities
Tolerance
Idealism
(constant)
F(df = 2)
Significant F
R2

.089
–.226
1.153
7.845
.000
.187

.253
–.291

2.236
–2.567
2.896

.028
.012
.005

January/February 2007

153

TABLE 6. Determinants of Ethical Attitudes of American and Hong Kong
Masters in Business Administration (MBA) Students
(Multiple Discriminant Analysis)
M

Downloaded by [Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji] at 23:23 11 January 2016

Variable
Nontheism or theism
Achievement or experience
Detachment or involvement
Tolerance or intolerance
Humanism or behaviorism
Negativism or positivism
Relativisma
Idealisma
Receiving and abetting
acadmic dishonestyb
Getting involved in
questionable academic
dishonesty activitiesb
Oppotunism
MANOVA

Canonical
loadings

p

U.S.
group

H. K.
group

–.4385
–.1986
.6016
.4325
–.2811
–.2875
.2469
–.1103

.000
.025
.000
.000
.002
.001
.005
.212

13.14
10.27
7.40
9.51
8.16
11.46
3.39
3.79

10.90
9.77
9.22
10.69
7.28
10.49
3.59
3.67

.2458

.006

1.50

1.66

.3618
.0346

.000
.695

2.22
2.56

2.56
2.60

.0001

Note. aMeasured on a 5-point scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). bMeasured on
a 5–point scale (1 = strongly believe that it is wrong, 5 = strongly believe that it is not wrong).

Kong students, it was a negative determinant of both of the dimensions of academic dishonesty, receiving and abetting academic dishonesty and getting
involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities. Other results suggested that for the Hong Kong sample,
positivism (H4a) was a negative determinant of receiving and abetting academic
dishonesty, whereas for the American
sample it was not. In addition, for the
U.S. group, theism (H7a) was negatively
associated with getting involved in
questionable academic dishonesty activities, but for the Hong Kong group it
was not. Overall, opportunism (H8a) was
the most significant determinant of academic dishonesty practices.
The influences of achievement versus
experience (H2a), relativism (H3a),
humanism versus behaviorism (H5a),
and detachment versus attachment (H6a)
were not supported for either the American group or the Hong Kong group.

oriented (H2b ), more negatively oriented
(H4b), more humanistic-oriented (H5b),
and less theistic (H7b) than were American MBA students. Furthermore, and
contrary to predictions, we found Hong
Kong MBA students to be more relativistic (H3b) and more detached (H6b)
than were the U.S. students. There were
no significant differences between the
two samples regarding idealism (H3b)
and opportunism (H8b).
Although there were no specific
hypotheses regarding the two dimensions
of academic dishonesty, we compared the
two samples on both dimensions (see
Table 4). Results showed that there were
significant results related to the differences between the two samples, and
Hong Kong MBA students were more
likely than were American students to
believe that “receiving and abetting academic dishonesty” and “getting involved
in questionable academic dishonesty
activities” were not wrong.

Hypotheses1b–8b

DISCUSSION

In support of Hypotheses1b–8b,
MANOVA and MDA analyses found
that Hong Kong MBA students were
more tolerant (H1b), less achievement-

Overall, although many of the independent variables did not survive in the
stepwise regressions, the results provided some support to the relationships. In

154

Journal of Education for Business

the American sample, opportunism
appeared twice, and theism, tolerance of
academic dishonesty, and idealism each
appeared once, all with the expected
signs. Tolerance and opportunism
explained 31.8% of receiving and abetting academic dishonesty. Theism, idealism, and opportunism explained 22.3%
of getting involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities. In the Hong
Kong sample, idealism appeared twice,
and opportunism, tolerance of academic
dishonesty, positivism, and idealism
each appeared once, all with the expected signs. Positivism, idealism, and
opportunism explained 35.2% of receiving and abetting academic dishonesty.
Tolerance of academic dishonesty and
idealism explained 18.7% of getting
involved in questionable academic dishonesty activities.
Apparently, opportunism and tolerance of academic dishonesty had the
greatest impact upon the attitudes of the
U.S. MBA students toward the two
forms of academic dishonesty. MBA
students who scored high on tolerance
of academic dishonesty and opportunism were most likely to be engaged
in academic dishonesty. Theistic and
idealistic students tended to find some
forms of academic dishonesty less
acceptable.
The results of this analysis revealed
that the characteristics of the American
MBA students most likely to find any
form of academic dishonesty acceptable
included high scores on tolerance of
academic dishonesty and opportunism
and low scores on idealism and theism.
Conversely, the characteristics of the
American MBA students most likely to
find any form of academic dishonesty
unacceptable included low scores on
tolerance of academic dishonesty and
opportunism and high scores on idealism and theism.
For Hong Kong MBA students,
opportunism, idealism, and tolerance of
academic dishonesty had considerable
influence upon their attitudes toward the
two forms of academic dishonesty. In
addition, among Hong Kong MBA students, positivism tended to be negatively associated with academic dishonesty.
The characteristics of Hong Kong MBA
students most likely