Indonesian university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: understanding its consequences and the benefits of awareness
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28918/erudita.v5i2.10867Abstract
Plagiarism remains a persistent challenge in higher education, particularly within Indonesia, where linguistic barriers and academic pressures contribute to its prevalence. Although previous studies have addressed the causes and prevalence of plagiarism, limited attention has been paid to students’ understanding of its academic consequences and the benefits of such awareness. This study investigates Indonesian EFL university students’ perceptions of plagiarism, focusing on their knowledge of its consequences in research writing and the perceived advantages of understanding these repercussions. Adopting a qualitative descriptive-exploratory design with quantitative support, data were collected from twenty students through open- and closed-ended questionnaires. Thematic and descriptive statistical analyses revealed that while students showed general awareness of plagiarism’s academic and legal consequences, gaps remained in their understanding of severe penalties. Moreover, students perceived that awareness of plagiarism consequences helped them avoid academic dishonesty, boosted confidence, promoted responsible behavior, and reduced the temptation to plagiarize. These findings imply the need for more comprehensive, practical academic integrity education to strengthen students’ ethical writing practices and enhance institutional efforts to combat plagiarism.
Keywords:
References
Akbar, A., & Picard, M. (2019). Understanding plagiarism in Indonesia from the lens of plagiarism policy: Lessons for universities. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 15(7), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-019-0044-2
Alua, M. A., Asiedu, N. K., & Bumbie-Chi, D. M. (2022). Students’ perception of plagiarism and usage of Turnitin anti-plagiarism software: The role of the library. Journal of Library Administration, 63(1), 119–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930826.202146445
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018
Buranen, L., & Roy, A. M. (1999). Perspectives on plagiarism and intellectual property in a postmodern world. SUNY Press.
Carroll, J. & Appleton, J. (2001). Plagiarism: A good practice guide. https://i.unisa.edu.au/siteassets/staff/tiu/documents/plagiarism---a-good-practice-guide-by-oxford-brookes-university.pdf.
Creswell, J. W., Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Daulay, S. H., Faridah, F., Shaumiwaty, S., & Kurniati, E. Y. (2021). How to enlarge students’ literacy culture in the digital era? Proceedings of National Education: LPPM IKIP PGRI Bojonegoro, 2(1), 80–84. https://prosiding.ikippgribojonegoro.ac.id/index.php/prosiding/article/view/1143
Gullifer, J., & Tyson, G. A. (2010). Exploring university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: A focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, 35(4), 463–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070903096508
Hu, G., & Lei, J. (2014). Chinese university students’ perceptions of plagiarism. Ethics & Behavior, 25(3), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.923313
Keck, C., & Kim, Y. (2014). Pedagogical grammar. John Benjamin
Liu, M., & Wu, Y. (2020). Chinese undergraduate EFL learners’ perceptions of plagiarism and use of citations in course papers. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2020.1855769
Maharajh, L. R. (2020). Exploring university students’ perceptions of plagiarism: A focus group study. 2018 International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research, 2020, 54–69. https://doi.org/10.26803/myres.2020.05
McCabe, D. L. (2005). Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity, 1(1). https://doi.org:10.21913/IJEI.v1i1.14
Merkel, W. (2021). Simple, yet complex: pre-service teachers’ conceptions of plagiarism at a Norwegian university. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(6), 923–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1939778
Nasution, U. A., Nabila, A., & Daulay, S. H. (2024). “Publish or not”: An output problem of higher education students. Wacana: Jurnal Penelitian Bahasa, Sastra dan Pengajaran, 22(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.33369/jwacana.v22i1.31703
National Commission for the Protection of human subjects of biomedical and behavioral research. (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed-method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42, 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Pecorari, D. (2008). Academic writing and plagiarism: A linguistic analysis. Continuum.
Sayeda, S. K. (2024). Plagiarism in academic and professional settings: Dimensions, consequences, and preventive measures. Bangladesh Journal of Bioethics, 15(1), 22–24. https://doi.org/10.62865/bjbio.v15i1.109
Shen, Y., & Hu, G. (2020). Chinese graduate students’ perceptions of plagiarism: A mixed-methods study. Accountability in Research, 28(4), 197–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1819253
Sun, X., & Hu, G. (2022). Institutional policies on plagiarism management: A comparison of universities in mainland China and Hong Kong. Accountability in Research, 31(4), 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2022.2120390
Sutherland-Smith, W. (2008). Plagiarism, the internet, and student learning: Improving academic integrity. Routledge.
Tambunan, A. R. S., Lubis, F. K., Saragih, B., Andayani, W., Ginting, S. A., & Siregar, U. D. (2023). Indonesian undergraduate students’ perspectives of plagiarism: An interview study. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 23(4). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i4.5896
Tambunan, A. R. S., Andayani, W., Sari, W. S., & Lubis, F. K. (2021). Investigating EFL students’ linguistic problems using Grammarly as automated writing evaluation feedback. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v12i1.46428
Waltzer, T., & Dahl, A. (2020). Students’ perceptions and evaluations of plagiarism: Effects of text and context. Journal of Moral Education, 50(4), 436–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2020.1787961
Downloads
Published
Article Statistics
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Hilyati Fitria Harahap, Arkana Hady, Sholihatul Hamidah Daulay
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Erudita: Journal of English Language Teaching is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. An author who publishes in Erudita: Journal of English Language Teaching agrees to the following terms:
- Author retains the copyright and grants the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal
- Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with the acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Author is permitted and encouraged to post his/her work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
