「作弊」一直是現代教育體制一個很嚴重的問題，從經濟學的角度來看，教師與學生之間存在著「資訊不對稱」，因此只能用考試的方式來衡量學生對於課程的努力程度，而學生會選擇考試作弊必然是有極大的誘因，且其誘因大於被逮到的風險成本，但不管有什麼樣的理由，作弊仍然是一種欺騙的行為。
本研究利用發放線上問卷的方式，以統計套裝軟體SPSS進行多項統計分析，藉以了解學生對於作弊的態度及看法，並提出改善建議，本研究分析所探討的自變數是對於影響作弊可能因素的認同程度，與其他文獻研究直接討論影響作弊因素的可能性，有著很大的不同，因為一位學生的認同程度高低不一定會影響這位學生的作弊可能性。
最後研究結果發現，無論性別或年級，多數沒有作弊過的學生，其不作弊的原因為「道德良心因素使其不敢作弊」；而多數作弊過的學生，其作弊過的原因為「準備時間不足」；且不同性別對於「考試次數變多」、「修習過多學分」、「在校成績不佳」、「準備時間不足」等個人特徵變數對作弊機率的影響之「認同程度」均有顯著差異；而「性別」、修習學分數過多與在校成績不佳之「認同程度」、「看過其他同學作弊」及「看過其他同學作弊被逮」與「作弊可能性」具有顯著關係。

"Cheating" has been a serious problem in the modern education system. From the perspective of economics, there is an "information asymmetry" between teachers and students. Therefore, teachers can only use the test to measure the degree of students' efforts in the class. Students choosing cheating on the exams means it have great incentives, and its incentives are greater than the risk of being caught, but for whatever reasons, cheating is still an fraudulent action.
In this study, online questionnaires were used to conduct statistical analysis of statistical package software SPSS to understand students' attitudes and opinions toward cheating in the classroom, and suggestions for improvement were proposed. The Independent variables discussed in this research analysis are the factors that may influence the factors that affect cheating degree, and other literature research directly discuss the factors that affect the possibility of cheating, there is a big difference, because a student's level of recognition does not certainly affect the student's possibility of cheating.
At the end of the study, it was found that majority of students who had no cheating, regardless of gender or grade, did not cheat because “the moral conscience makes them afraid to cheat.” For most students who cheat, the reason for the cheating is “inadequate preparation time. " Last but not least, There was a significant relationship between “gender,” “degree of recognition” of poor performance in the university and excessive credits, “seen cheating on other students” and “seen arrested because of cheating on other students” and “cheating possibility”.

論文審定書........................................................ i
摘要.............................................................. ii
Abstract............................................................ iii
第一章 緒論........................................................ 1
第一節 研究動機................................................ 1
第二節 研究目的................................................ 2
第三節 研究範圍與對象.......................................... 2
第四節 研究流程................................................ 3
第二章 文獻回顧.................................................... 4
第一節 影響作弊因素方面........................................ 4
第二節 威懾措施方面............................................ 5
第三節 同儕文化方面............................................ 7
第三章 研究方法.................................................... 8
第一節 研究架構................................................ 8
第二節 抽樣方式................................................ 8
第三節 資料分析方法............................................ 9
第四章 資料分析結果............................................... 11
第五章 研究結果.................................................... 22
第一節 樣本結構資料與影響作弊因素間之關係...................... 22
第二節 學生作弊可能性與學生對於作弊態度及看法之迴歸模型驗證..... 24
第三節 研究結果與文獻比較之異同................................ 27
第六章 結論與建議................................................... 29
參考文獻............................................................ 32
附錄................................................................ 33

1. Becker, G.S. (1968). “Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 76, No. 2, pp. 169-217.
2. Bunn, D.N., Caudill S.B. and Gropper, D.M. (1992). “Crime in the Classroom: An Economic Analysis of Undergraduate Student Cheating Behavior,” The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 197-207.
3. Burrus, R., McGoldrick, K., and Schuhmann, P. (2007). “Self-Reports of Student Cheating: Does a Definition of Cheating Matter?”The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 3–16.
4. Chaudhuri, A. & Mukherjee, R. (1988). “Randomized Response: Theory and Methods,”Marcel-Decker, New York.
5. Harmon, O.R. & Lambrinos, J. (2008). “Are Online Exams an Invitation to Cheat? ”The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 116-125.
6. Hetherington, E. M., & Feldman, S. E. (1964). “College Cheating as a Function of Subject and Situational Variables,”Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 212-218.
7. Kerkvliet, J. (1994). “Cheating by Economics Students: A Comparison of Survey Results,” Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 121-133.
8. Kerkvliet, J. & Sigmund, C.L. (1999). “Can We Control Cheating in the Classroom?”The Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 331-343.
9. Lin, C.H., & Wen, L.Y. (2007). “Academic Dishonesty in Higher Education - A Nationwide Study in Taiwan,” Higher Education, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 85-97.
10. McCabe, D. L. (2005). “Cheating among College and University Students: A North American Perspective,” International Journal for Educational Integrity, Vol. 1, No. 1.
11. Moffatt, M. (1990). “Undergraduate Cheating,” Non-Journal, New Brunswick, Rutgers University.
12. Singhal, A. C. (1982). “Factors in Student Dishonesty, ”Psychological Reports, Vol.51, No. 4, pp.775-780.
13. Tittle, C. R. and Rowe, A.R. (1973). “Moral Appeal, Sanction Threat and Deterrence: An Experimental Test, ” Social Problems, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp.488-498.