FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS’ ATTITUDES
TOWARDS PLAGIARISM: THE CASE OF VIETNAM
Hoang Thi Hue

Faculty of Human Resources Economics and Management, National Economics
University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Nguyen Thi Thom
,
Trinh Thi Nhat Le

Human Resources Economics and Management 57, Faculty of Human Resources
Economics and Management, National Economics University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Abstract:
Plagiarism is a frequent form of misconduct in academic environment, however the
way that students recognize it is quite a new subject in Viet Nam. This research is to
examine different factors affecting attitudes of students towards plagiarism in Viet Nam by
questioning 845 students. The methodologies of Cronbach‟s Alpha, Exploratory Factor
Analyzing (EFA) and linear multiple regressioning were used by SPSS program. The
results show that there are 4 major factors having significant influence on students‟
attitudes towards plagiarism, including institution, lack of awareness, personal attitudes
and lack of competence. Pressure and internet facilities have no impact on student‟s
attitudes towards plagiarism. From that result, we also suggest that on the long term there
must be some solutions to reduce the proclivity towards plagiarism.
Key words: Attitudes, plagiarism, Viet Nam.
1. Introduction
The rationale of the study
The education system in every area of the country has been facing a real challenge,
which is cheating in academic. In the case of higher education, the time that students have
to complete tasks that require innovative thinking more than ever before, plagiarism is a
typical form of academic misconduct. McCabe et al. (2001) claimed that student‘s
academic misconduct, such as cheating and plagiarism, has increased in recent decades and

is an important concern in higher education. According to an article pulished on Thanh
Nien online (2012), in fact, plagiarism from each other has been taken openly and
popularly by not only students but also teachers in academic environment of Viet Nam.
Gullifer and Tyson (2010) suggested that theory and research in psychology show that a
thorough understanding of an individual's view of an issue or problem is an essential
requirement for successful change of that person's attitudes and behaviour.

552


Purpose statement
The purpose of this research is to explore what factors that have impact on students‘
attitudes towards plagiarism are. Also studying how to measure each factor influences on
this attitudes. Morever, we generate a model and validate the model of the impact of these
factors on students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism.
Research questions
To better understand factors that affect students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism, we
sought to answer these questions:
1. How does pressure influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
2. How does internet facilities influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
3. How does institution influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
4. How does lack of awareness influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
5. How does personal attitudes influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
6. How does lack of competence influence students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism?
2. Literature review
Attitudes towards plagiarism
Plagiarism is a popular problem also is misunderstood by lacking of knowledge and
skills. Researchers claimed that many people do not actually comprehend what plagiarism
is. According to Smith et al. (2007), plagiarism is using other‘s words and ideas on purpose
without accepting sources clearly. In addition, Smith et el said that plagiarism is a form of

dishonest about mind, it is relevant to using other‘s words without citing
and acknowledging fully. The intentional behavior including copy someone‘s idea and turn
it into themselves is also considered a type of plagiarism.
According to Fishbein‘s literature (1961, p14), ―Attitude is viewed as effective or
evaluative in nature, and that it is determined by the person‘s beliefs about the attitude
object. Most people hold both positive and negative beliefs about an object, and attitude is
viewed as corresponding to the total affect asscociated with their beliefs‖. Fishbein and
Ajzen (1975) also claimed that attitude towards an object is viewed as related to the
person‘s intentions to perform a variety of behaviours with respect to that object. So we
can conclude that attitude towards plagiarism is related to an individual‘s intention of
plagiarizing behavior.
Many different studies have given factors that influence on plagiarism tendency.
Harding et al. (2001) divided into three main group: demographic characteristic factors,
social - economics factors and circumstance factors. Demographic characteristic factors
include: gender, extracurricular activitie joining, age and educational level (graduate and
postgraduate). Dordoy (2002) claimed that important factors that have impact on
plagiarism are promotion, laziness or untimely management, accessibility to Internet
materials, unaware of rules and regulations, and unintentional theft. Love and Simmons

553


(1998), together with Scanlon and Neumann (2002), proposed six factors contributing to
plagiarism: lack of awareness, individual attitudes, availability of resources Internet, lack
of capacity, pressure and institutional characteristics.
Base on Smith et al. (2007), our research team decided to investigate six factors
which have influence on students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism. They are: pressure,
internet facilities, institution, lack of awareness, personal attitude and lack of competence.
Pressure
Collins and Morris (2008) said that stress is a phenomenon involving the process of

complex interaction between a person and their environment, which is constantly
changing. As a result of stress, psychological, behavioral and physical symptoms can
occur, increasing dissatisfaction and anxiety, which may produce a variety of illness. In
term of academic, pressure of time that students have to complete assigment is the factor
that promotes students to choose to plagiarize instead of doing by themselves. Moeck
(2002) claimed that some students feel pressure to get better grades and some students
struggle academically and feel that cheating is their only path to any kind of success. With
tremendous pressure and competition for grades, some will cheat or plagiarize to maintain
a high GPA, which can please parents, result in selection to school leadership roles, and
impress corporate recruiters.
Internet facilities
Accoding to Razera (2011) the development of the internet for the past decades
made possible the spread of information (any information) worldwide. Thus, almost
everything is possible to be found in the internet, from articles and papers presented/
published in prestigious conferences, journals to websites with texts written by anonymous
persons. Within the ambit of this study, internet facilities were mentioned as the things that
enable to disseminate any kind of information by a simple way all over the world. That
also means that it is so easy and quick to access and copy available documents via internet.
It has been alleged that the widespread availability of access to the Internet, and online
academic journals have contributed much to the rising incidence of plagiarism, as they
have made it possible for students to find and save large amounts of information from
diverse sources with little reading, effort or originality (McKenzie, 1998). In addition, the
use of the Internet for assignment completion was found to be strongly positively
correlated to plagiarism (Eccles et al., 2006).
Institution
Smith et al. (2007) said that institution-specific factors can take many forms,
including the attitudes of lecturers and administrators to the incidence of plagiarism, and
the associated prevention, detection and punishment mechanisms in place. FranklynStokes and Newstead (1995) argued that administrators and academic staff may not be
doing enough to identify and implement measures to limit student plagiarism. In addition,
Kibler (1994) also said institutional action on student plagiarism is generally of a reactive

nature and is not nearly proactive enough in attempting to prevent or reduce it.

554


Lack of awareness
Lack of awareness is understood here as the case of students do not keep track of
things which significantly component plagiarism so they don‘t consider it as a problem.
Although students have a sound understanding of plagiarism‘s definition, their knowledge
of actions forming plagiarism is also diversified. Walker (1998) said that some forms of
plagiarism may merely stem from lack of awareness of academic conventions or simple
carelessness on the part of the student. Share Walker‘s views, Harris, R. (2002) claimed
that there may be a similar lack of awareness about the significance of the offence and
likely penalties. Many other students know what plagiarism is, but don't consider it wrong.
The belief that ―information wants to be free‖ and the idea that copying from sources with
a few words of one's own is merely ―patch writing‖ a normal way to write, support these
students in their beliefs. Dawson and Overfield (2006) determined that students were aware
that plagiarism is bad but they were not clear of what constitutes plagiarism and how to
avoid it. Students required that teachers should also observe the rules to avoid plagiarism
and they should be consistently reminded of awareness about plagiarism to enforce the
university resolve to control this academic sin.
Personal attitudes
Most of previous studies had shown that if students don‘t seriously attempt and be
willing to complete assignments, they will choose cheating or plagiarising for certain.
Plagiarism rate is directly proportional to the hardness‘ rate of assignment. They are not
compassionate to work or learn, they fear large amount of tasks which are need to do.
Thomas and Znaniecki (1918-1920) - the first people using attitude‘s defininition - claimed
that ―attitude is individually mental state towards a value‖. There are two forms of personal
attitude: positive and negative. According to Ashworth et al (1997) another reason was
revealed by students is that lectures‘ neutral towards plagiarist, they are also aware of

plagiarism as a small problem.
Lack of competence
There are some studies had shown that study and teaching method also have parts in
factors that influence on plagiarism. Sterngold (2004) argued that normal teaching methods
have suggested and led to plagiarism behaviour. He also claimed that most of students
have poor research and writing skills. Nearly all have no idea how to evaluate source‘s
quality and suitability or collect and integrate data from numerous sources but they are
unble to use it to write themselves‘ in a clear and logical way. They also do not know how
to support their own ideas by proofs and arguments.
Proposed model
The model as proffered by Smith et al. (2007) explained the impact of six factors
which include pressure, internet facilities, institutions, lack of awareness, personal attitudes
and lack of competence on the students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism. We used Smith et
al.‘s model (2007) as our original model for our study. In addition to proposing the direct
impact of six factors on students‘ attitudes plagiarism. (Figure 1)

555


Figure 1: Proposed model
Presure

Internet facilities

Students‘ attitudes
towards plagiarism

Institution

Lack of awareness


Personal attitudes

Lack of competence

Source: Smith et al. (2007)
Hypotheses
Hypothesis 1 (H1): Pressure has a negative impact on students' attitudes towards
plagiarism.
Hypothesis 2 (H2): Internet facilities have a negative impact on students' attitudes
towards plagiarism.
Hypothesis 3 (H3): Institution have a negative impact on students' attitudes towards
plagiarism.
Hypothesis 4 (H4): Lack of awareness has a negative impact on students' attitudes
towards plagiarism.
Hypothesis 5 (H5): Personal attitudes have a negative impact on students' attitudes
towards plagiarism.
Hypothesis 6 (H6): Lack of competence has a negative impact on students' attitudes
towards plagiarism.
3. Method
Research instruments
Our study used the Likert scale of 5 points from 1 - ―absolutely not agree‖ to point
5 - ―absolutely agre‖ for both dependent and independent variables based on the scale
listed in Table 1.

556


Table1: Variables
Factor


1. Pressure

2. Internet
facilities

3. Institution

Observed
variables
PR1

I have limited time to finish work

PR2

I feel pressure to complete too many assignments
during a given time period

PR3

I have too many subjects in one particular
semester

PR4

I feel pressure from peers

IF1


I think that cutting and pasting from the internet
and word processing is much easier and faster

IF2

I find it is easy to download articles from websites

IF3

I find that there is too much information available in
electronic format especially from websites.

IN1

I do not know the legal implication of plagiarism

IN2

Lectures do not care about plagiarism, they are
too busy so usually do not response to develope
my writing.

IN3
IN4

4. Lack of
awareness

5. Personal
attitudes


6. Lack of
competence

7. Attitudes
towards
plagiarism

Description

References

Applied scale
adjustments of
Smith et al. (2007)
and Husain et al.
(2017)

Applied scale
adjustments of
Smith et al. (2007)

Applied scale
adjustments of
Smith et al. (2007);
Normal lecture method does not make me Amiri and Razmjoo
(2016)and Husain
acquire new knowledge that leads to plagiarism.
et al. (2017)
Universities do not have a clear policy on

academic misconduct behaviours.

LA1

I do not understand what constitutes plagiarism

LA2

I do not see plagiarism as a problem

LA3

I was not aware of plagiarism when in high school.

LA4

I was not aware of serious level of plagiarim

PA1

I do not have the desire to work or learn

PA2

I do not feel the need for knowledge in the future

PA3

I am not interested in the topic


PA4

I am lazy and used to delaying work

LC1

I do not have the confidence to prepare a good
assignment

LC2

I have poor research skills

LC3

I have difficulty in studying abouts subjects

ATP1

Sometimes I feel tempted to plagiarise

ATP2

I know what plagiarism is.

ATP3

Plagiarism is as bad as stealing an exam.

Applied scale

adjustments of Smith
et al. (2007) and
Madray (2007)

Applied scale
adjustments of
Smith et al. (2007)

Applied scale
adjustments of
Smith et al. (2007)

Applied
scale
adjustments
of
Ehrich et al (2015)

557


Factor

Observed
variables

Description

ATP4


Using others‘ work with their permission is ok

ATP5

Plagiarism is ok if the Professor gives you too
much work

ATP6

Punishment for plagiarism should be light

ATP7

Downloaded papers and using as one‘s own
should mean expulsion from university

ATP8

Plagiarism is against my ethical values

ATP9

Plagiarism involves taking others‘ words, not
property, so it‘s no big deal

ATP10
ATP11
ATP12

References


You can‘t plagiarise yourself
If I lend a paper to a student to look at who
plagiarises, I should not be punished also
Plagiarists should receive a special grade for
cheating, which would deter them

Sample and Data collection
Because our study seeks to explore what factors and how these factors affects
students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism, we use a sample of some universities in Vietnam:
National Economics University, Hanoi University of Science and Technology, University
of Labor and Social Affairs, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi University of Industry,
Trade Union University, Thuyloi University. These universities‘ students are highly
representative for economic and technological students in Ha Noi. To achieve the objective
of the study, we conducted the survey by sending questionnaires to students from the
above selected universities in Ha Noi. We received 871 replies and used 845 qualified
answers in the analysis. We analyzed the data using SPSS software version 20.0 with the
following specific steps:
Firstly: Do statistics describing the observable variables of the scale.
Secondly: Assess the reliability of the scale.
Thirdly: Verify the value of the scale by means of exploratory factor analysis - EFA.
Fourthly: Analyze correlation and multiple regression.
4. Result
Cronbach‟s Alpha
The ―Pressure‖ independent variable has a coefficient of Cronbach's Alpha of 0.614,
ranging from 0.6 to 0.8, so that the scales are linked together and it is an usable measurement
scale. However, the fourth observation variable was rejected due to inadequate requirements
that the total variable correlation coefficient is 0,299 (less than 0.3).
The independent variable ―Attitudes towards plagiarism‖ has a Cronbach's Alpha
coefficient greater than 0.6, so the scale can be used relatively well. However, after five

times, there are five observation variables have a total correlation coefficient of less than

558


0.3 are eliminated. They are ATP2, ATP3, ATP7, ATP8, ATP12 with the total variable
correlation coefficients in turn are 0.159, 0.211, 0.226, 0.182, 0.283.
Other independent variables all have coefficients of Cronbach‘s Alpha more than
0.8. So, this is a relatively good scale.
After eliminating inappropriate observational variables, we conducted a test to
check reliability again. The values of the Cronbach's Alpha coefficient showed that the
scales were good, reasonable and consistent. The results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2: Reliability
Cronbach’s alpha

Number of varibales

Pressure

0,615

3

Lack of awareness

0.706

4

Internet facilities


0,771

3

Personal attitudes

0,702

4

Lack of competence

0,747

3

Institution

0,736

4

Attitudes towards plagiarism

0, 698

7

Variables


Thus, the results of evaluating reliability of the scale by scale by Cronbach's Alpha
indicated that the scale is reliable and can be used in future analysis.
Exploratory factor analysis (EFA)
To eliminate scales that are not sufficiently reliable, retaining high adhesion scales,
can be grouped into factors that accurately reflect the variables measured in the model, we
conducted exploratory factor analysis. Factor analysis is conducted once. Scales‘ reliability
is quite high, no observed variables are excluded and independent variable groups,
dependent variable groups remain unchanged. Independent variables include pressure,
internet facilities, institution, lack of awareness, personal attitudes, lack of competence.
Dependent variable is attitudes towards plagiarism.
Table 3. Exploratory factors analysis - EFA
KMO

P- value

Average
Variance
Extracted

Factor
Loading

Conclusion

Independent Variables

0.800

.000


59.939

0.800

Qualified

Dependent Variables

0.772

.000

51.958

0.772

Qualified

Table 3 shows that the KMO coefficients are greater than 0.5, indicating that factor
analysis is appropriate. Bartlett's test is statistically significant at the 5% significance level,
indicating that the observed variables are correlated in magnitude. When analyzing the

559


EFA factor for independent variables, all the factor load of the observed variables satisfies
the condition (factor load > 0.5) and the number of factors created is coincide with the
number of factor we had in the beginning. They are "Pressure‖, ―Internet facilities‖,
―Institution‖, ―Lack of awareness‖, ―Personal attitudes‖, ―Lack of competence‖. Table 3

also shows that the cumulative of variance is 59.939% (greater than 50%), it means there
are 59.939% changes in attitudes towards plagiarism explained by the observed variables.
When analyzing dependent variables, the factor load of all observed variable satisfies the
condition that the factor load is greater than 0.5. To sum up, after using the EFA
exploratory factor analysis, the results show all factors have all the same observation
variables that load a factor. Therefore, the scales selected for the variables in the model are
guaranteed to be required, capable of better interpretation and analysis.
Correlation analysis
From the results of Cronbach‘s Alpha, the independent variable of model is adjusted.
Y: Attitudes towards plagiarism (disregard ATP2, ATP3, ATP7, ATP8, ATP12)
We used Pearson correlation coefficient to evaluate the correlation between
variables in the model (the results of correlation analysis of variables in the model are
presented in Table 4). The results showed that the correlation coefficient (r) has a value of
r>0, indicating that the variables are positively correlated.
Table 4: Mean, standard deviation and correlation coefficient
Variables

Mean

SD

ATP

PR

LA

IF

PA


LC

IN

ATP

2.87

0.67

1

0.136

0.371

0.136

0.249

0.254

0.349

PR

3.29

0.69


1

0.159

0.280

0.134

0.174

0.138

LA

2.75

0.73

1

0.179

0.242

0.352

0.326

IF


3.65

0.75

1

0.006

0.222

0.215

PA

2.21

0.71

1

0.285

0.276

LC

3.06

0.72


1

0.256

IN

3.00

0.73

1

The ―Attitudes towards plagiarism‖ variable is strongly correlated with the ―Lack of
awareness‖ variable and the ―Institution‖ variable, and the coefficients are 0.371 and 0.349
respectively. The correlation coefficients of the ―Pressure‖ variable and the variable
―Internet facilities‖ was 0.280, respectively, therefore the ―Pressure‖ variable quitely
correlated with ―Internet facilities‖. The correlation between the ―Lack of awareness‖
variable and the two variables ―Lack of competence‖ and ―Institution‖ are 0.352 and 0.326,
so these two variables are closely related to ―Lack of awareness‖. Correlation coefficient
between the ―Personal attitudes‖ variable and the ―Lack of competence‖ variable is 0.285,
so the two variables have a relatively correlation. Thus, most of the independent variables
in each model are quite close correlated.

560


Regression analysis and hypothesis testing
Six factors (presssure, internet facilties, institution, lack of awareness, personal
attitudes, lack of competence) influencing on students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism

Table 5: Regression between six above factors and students’ attitudes towards plagiarism

Model

Unstandardized
Coefficients
B

1. Constant

Std. Error

Standardized
Coefficients

t

Collinearity
Statistics

Sig.

Beta

Tolerance

VIF

1.067


.151

7.084 .000

Pressure

.035

.032

.036 1.098 .272

.894

1.119

Lack of awareness

.219

.031

.240 7.028 .000

.799

1.252

Internet facilities


.018

.030

.021

.620 .535

.854

1.171

Personal attitudes

.100

.031

.106 3.185 .002

.847

1.180

Lack of competence

.069

.032


.074 2.164 .031

.796

1.256

Institution

.194

.031

.213 6.301 .000

.818

1.223

a. Dependent Variable: Students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism
According to table 5, the results of the regression analysis showed that there are two
factors including ―Pressure‖ and ―Internet facilities‖ have sig values are 0.272 and 0.535
(more than 0.05) so these factors do not influence on students‘ attitudes towards
plagiarism. We can conclude that the hypotheses H1 and H2 were rejected. Statistical
results of the regression analysis on the standardized β coefficient resulted that ―Lack of
awareness‖, ―Personal attitudes‖, ―Lack of competence‖ and ―Insitution‖ all have sig
values less than 0.05. That means these four factors have impact on dependent variable so
the hypotheses H3, H4, H5, H6 were improved. Thus, the factor that has the greatest
impact on students' attitudes towards plagiarism is the factor ―Lack of awareness‖. Then
the second factor‘s impact is ―Insitution‖. The weaker impact factors is the ―Personal
attitudes‖ and the ―Lack of competence‖.

From the above result, there is regression model:
TD = 0.24*LA + 0.106*PA + 0.074*PA + 0.213*IN
4. Discussion and Conclusion
Misconduct in academic environment, specifically plagiarism behaviour of students is a
serious problem which education has to face. To reduce and prevent this behavior, we need to
understand students‘ attitudes towards it and what factors have impact on plagiarism. It is also
this study‘s aim. To find the answer, we carry out by quantitative research.

561


A number of these variables contributed to the factors previously identified by
Smith, Ghazali and Fatimah (2007) (i.e. institution, personal attitudes, lack of awareness).
The same point between their result and ours is both found that there is no evidence
showed a significant link between students‘ attitudes towards plagiarism and ―pressure‖
(H1), internet facilities (H2). However, while Smith et al‘s study indicated ―Lack of
competence‖ factor had not impact on dependent variable, our study‘s result is opposite.
Specifically, the results indicate that pressure and internet facilities have no impact on
student‘s attitudes towards plagiarism. There are four fators including institution, lack of
awareness, personal atttitudes and lack of competence influence on this attitudes.
In conclusion, one of the first steps towards preventing plagiarism lies in raising
awareness as to its nature and its significance. The education program should provide
promulgate a official plagiarism‘s definition and concrete examples for making students
have full knowledge about plagiarism. Morever, understanding citation and reference law
may be helpful in decreasing plagiarism. Also to improve students‘ attitudes towards
plagiarism there must be measure to tighten the educational institution. There must be clear
rules which are relevant to academic misconduct behaviours and deserved punishments.
Besides, ameliorating students‘ competence and personal attiudes is necessary. Courses in
dealing with limited competence skills of students such as: analazing, criticizing, writing
and paraphrasing) should be extended.

References
1. Amiri, F., & Razmjoo, S. A. (2016). On Iranian EFL undergraduate students‘
perceptions of plagiarism. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14(2), 115-131.
2. Ashworth, P., Bannister, P., Thorne, P., & Students on the Qualitative Research
Methods Course Unit. (1997). Guilty in whose eyes?University students’ perceptions of cheating
and plagiarism in academic work and assessment. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 187–203.

3. Bennett*, R. (2005). Factors associated with student plagiarism in a post‐1992
university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(2), 137-162.
4. Collins, S., Coffey, M., & Morris, L. (2008). Social work students: Stress,
support and well-being. British Journal of Social Work, 40(3), 963-982.
5. Ehrich, J., Howard, S., Tognolini, J., & Bokosmaty, S. (2015). Measuring
attitudes toward plagiarism: issues and psychometric solutions. Journal of Applied
Research in Higher Education, 7(2), 243-257.
6. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research.
7. Gullifer, J., & Tyson, G. A. (2010). Exploring university students' perceptions
of plagiarism: A focus group study. Studies in Higher Education, 35(4), 463-481.
8. Hard, S. F., Conway, J. M., & Moran, A. C. (2006). Faculty and college
student beliefs about the frequency of student academic misconduct. The Journal of Higher
Education, 77(6), 1058-1080.
9. Harris, R. (2002). Anti-plagiarism strategies for research papers. Virtual salt, 7.
10. Hosny, M., & Fatima, S. (2014). Attitude of students towards cheating and
plagiarism: University case study. Journal of Applied Sciences, 14(8), 748-757.

562


11. Husain, F. M., Al-Shaibani, G. K. S., & Mahfoodh, O. H. A. (2017).
Perceptions of and Attitudes toward Plagiarism and Factors Contributing to Plagiarism: a

Review of Studies. Journal of Academic Ethics, 15(2), 167-195.
12. Ramzan, M., Munir, M. A., Siddique, N., & Asif, M. (2012). Awareness about
plagiarism amongst university students in Pakistan. Higher education, 64(1), 73-84.
13. Razera, D. (2011). Awareness, attitude and perception of plagiarism among
students and teachers at Stockholm University. Unpublished Master‟s thesis. Stockholm
University, Sweden. Retrieved on August, 30, 2013.
14. Sarita, R. D. (2015). Academic cheating among students: pressure of parents
and teachers. International Journal of Applied Research 2015, 1(10), 793-797.
15. Smith, M., Ghazali, N., & Fatimah Noor Minhad, S. (2007). Attitudes towards
plagiarism among undergraduate accounting students: Malaysian evidence. Asian Review
of Accounting, 15(2), 122-146.
16. Thanh Nien Online (2012), Be strong with plagiarism, from
/>17. Walker, J. (1998). Student plagiarism in universities: What are we doing about
it?. Higher Education Research & Development, 17(1), 89-106.

563