Plagiarism in higher education has gaining the attention of many scholars as being one of the most potential threats for academic integrity. It is defined as introducing other people’s words and creative products as our own (Nealy, 2011).  Plagiarism in higher education emerges on various forms which indicate the necessity of addressing the reasons driving people for plagiarism. Owunwanne, Rustagi, and Dada (2010) suggested the reasons of student plagiarism in higher education as the extensive pressure on students to have good transcripts, widespread technology usage, and accessibility of free knowledge on the net. Moreover, Erkaya (2009) in his study investigated the causes of plagiarism among Turkish high school and graduate students and identified these causes as students’ lack of awareness and knowledge about writing a research paper, motivation for conducting research, and instructors’ unsupportive attitudes towards their writings.

The increase in the prevalence of plagiarism in higher education (Larkham & Manns, 2002) signifies the necessity to take measures for dealing with the ever-growing problem of academia. However, the first step should be the investigation of the current situation and appropriately assessing students’ attitudes toward plagiarism. Despite excessive number of studies conducted on this issue, the literature both in the world and in Turkey is limited regarding sound measures for assessing plagiarism. Indeed, the field is dominated with conceptual papers written with the aim of creating broad understanding of the issue (DeVoss & Rosati, 2002; Dyrud, 2011; Elbeck, 2009; Hall, 2011; Heather, 2010; Jameson, 2011; Kock & Davison, 2003). Also, various studies on plagiarism were conducted through qualitative research methodologies to investigate students’ perceptions at different educational levels regarding plagiarism and plagiarism related issues (Erkaya, 2009; Flint, Clegg, & Macdonald, 2006; Gullifer & Tyson, 2010; Pecorari, 2003; Power, 2009). However, the number of quantitative studies is limited and majorly concentrates on the relationship between participants’ demographics’ and frequency of plagiarism such as gender (Comas-Forgas & Sureda-Negre, 2010; Davis, Grover, Becker, & McGregor, 1992; Selwyn, 2008; Smyth & Davis, 2004), grade level of students (Selwyn, 2008; Lin and Wen, 2007; Walker, 2010), students’ GPA (Alam, 2004; Roig & Caso, 2005). Further, the scales developed in the field were generally gauge the prevalence of plagiarism and to display the characteristics of the individuals who plagiarize most and the context in which plagiarism occur (Lin & Wen, 2007; Owunwanne et al., 2010; Pickard, 2006; Selwyn, 2008). When it comes to attitudinal scales, the literature indicates the presence of some measures which gauge attitudes toward plagiarism (Eminoglu & Nartgun, 2009; Eret & Gokmenoglu, 2010; Mavrinac, Brumini, Bilic-Zulle, & Petrovecki, 2010; Pittam, Elander, Lusher, Fox, & Payne, 2009) although there are very few in number and they suffer from psychometric properties and content-context related issues.

To conclude, the literature signifies the lack of a valid and reliable scale measuring attitudes toward plagiarism of graduate and undergraduate students in Turkey. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to explicate the development of Attitudes toward Plagiarism scale and provide initial validity evidences. 

Breckler, S. J. (1984). Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as districts components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(6), 1191-1205. Eminoglu, E., & Nartgun, Z. (2009). A scale development study to measure academic dishonesty tendency of university students. International Journal of Human Sciences, 6(1), 215-240. Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: a case study with prospective academicians. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 3303-3307. Erkaya, O. R. (2009). Plagiarism by Turkish students: causes and solutions. Asian EFL Journal, 11(2), 86-103. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R.E., & Tatham, R.L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lin, C. H. S., & Wen, L. Y. M. (2007). Academic dishonesty in higher education-a nationwide study in Taiwan. Higher Education, 54, 85-97. Mavrinac, M, Brumini, G, Bilic-Zulle, L., & Petrovecki, M. (2010). Construction and validation of attitudes toward plagiarism questionnaire. Croatian Medical Journal, 51, 195-201. Nealy, C. (2011). Rethinking plagiarism. Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 205-209. Owunwanne, D., Rustagi, N., & Dada, R. (2010). Students’ perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in higher institutions. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7(11), 59-68. Pittam, G., Elander, J. Lusher, J., Foz, P., & Payne, N. (2009). Student beliefs and attitudes about authorial identity in academic writing. Studies in Higher Education, 34(2), 153-170. Selwyn, N. (2008). ‘Not necessariliy a bad thing …’: a study of online plagiarism amongst undergraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 465-479