A 1997 study found that cheating students commonly believed that the classes they cheated in were impersonal, poorly taught, or insignificant to their majors. Students believed that when answers were easily accessible through resources like Internet searches they are not necessary to learn. Students also shared a common belief that professors who ask such questions and don't detect cheating invite academic dishonesty by implying grades rather than learning are most important. Yet even in demanding classrooms, students feeling pressure to succeed in competitive environments resort to cheating, with focus on maintaining competitive scores rather than processing knowledge.
A 2001 study found that schools with strong honor codes reported fewer instances of cheating. In another study, when researchers from Swarthmore College and University of Michigan administered an assignment to two groups -- one of which first completed an online tutorial about avoiding plagiarism -- the tutorial group yielded two-thirds less plagiarism than the group without the tutorial. This and other findings have led researchers to understand not only that a lack of clear communication regarding academic integrity suggests detection and punishment are unlikely, but also that the meaning of cheating is not the same for everybody unless explicitly stated. For instance, 55 percent of faculty surveyed by Rutgers University researchers reported having observed cheating in their classrooms, while only 22 percent of students reported such observations.
Although students' accusations that instructors seem to invite instances of cheating in their classes may seem unbelievable, when Rutgers researchers conducted a survey of more than 4,000 schools in the United States and Canada, half the faculty members admitted they had ignored cheating at least once during their careers.
Another common reason students cited as motivation for cheating is that everyone else does it -- and their doing it as well keeps them from being left behind. In classes that are graded on a curve, one student's grades are affected by another's whether the student setting the curve has cheated or not. In these instances, students reason that it seems foolish not to cheat. Reports of cheating at the political level, within business operations, and at home seem to justify cheating at school for students who regard their educations as preparation for the real world, which they perceive as even more cutthroat. The practice has become so common across the facets of everyday life that students have become numb to it, considering it as part of how the game of life is played.