Developing a revised cross-cultural academic integrity questionnaire (CCAIQ-2)

Marcus A. Henning, Hassan Nejadghanbar, Ukachukwu Abaraogu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


Understanding and measuring levels of academic integrity within higher education institutions across the world is an important area of study in the era of educational internationalization. Developing a cross-cultural measure will undoubtedly assist in creating standardization processes and add to the discourse on cross-cultural understanding on what constitutes honest and dishonest action in the higher education context. This study has used a combination of exploratory and confirmatory factor analytical procedures to validate a previously published questionnaire, namely the cross-cultural academic integrity questionnaire (CCAIQ). Inspection of response distributions was also undertaken. Primary participants in this study were from Iran (n = 216), and secondary reference participants were from New Zealand (n = 366) and Nigeria (n = 330). The findings indicate that a revised questionnaire (CCAIQ-2) better represents the data obtained from all three regions. Three CCAIQ-2 domains are proposed: cheating, collusion and complying. However, the response distributions (skewness and kurtosis) indicated differences among the three groups, further suggesting that the theoretical constructs developed through factors analysis may not represent equivalence in terms of cross-cultural understanding. This research will inevitably create international debate on the measurement of integrity and how this measurement process can be used to establish internationally recognized and accountable educational regulations.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)241-255
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Academic Ethics
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2018


  • academic integrity
  • dishonest and honest behaviours
  • higher education
  • questionnaire design


Dive into the research topics of 'Developing a revised cross-cultural academic integrity questionnaire (CCAIQ-2)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this