Corrigendum

This article refers to:

Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university students

Bretag, T., R. Harper, M. Burton, C. Ellis, P. Newton, P. Rozenberg, S. Saddiqui, and K. van Haeringen. (2018). Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university students. Studies in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1462788

When the above article was first published online, the values in Table 2 and in the text related to them were not accurate. The correct table and related text can be found below:

Table 2. Frequency and nature of outsourcing behaviours.

Survey items		Bought, sold or traded notes		Provided assignment (for any reason)		Obtained assignment (to submit)	Provided exam assistance	Received exam assistance	Taken exam for other	Arranged for other to take exam
% of subset who reported engaging in behaviour		Cheating Group	Non-Cheating Group	Cheating Group	Non-Cheating Group	Cheating Group	Cheating Group	Cheating Group	Cheating Group	Cheating Group
		28.1% (n = 229/814)	14.5% (n = 1,863/12,837)	52.1% (n = 424/814)	25.6% (n = 3,274/12,772)	37% (n = 301/814)	53.2% (n = 415/780)	41% (n = 322/786)	7.9% (n = 62/789)	4.2% (n = 33/792)
	% who submitted as own work	–	–	–	–	68.5% (n = 196/286)	–	–	–	–
Frequency	1–2 times	37.6% (n = 86/229)	42.0% (n = 766/1,824)	36.6% (n = 155/424)	53% (n = 1705/3,217)	79.4% (n = 162/204)	58% (n = 239/412)	63.8% (n = 203/318)	81.7% (n = 49/60)	62.5% (n = 20/32)
	3–5 times	32.8% (n = 75/229)	32.7% (n = 596/1,824)	37% (n = 157/424)	34.3% (n = 1103/3,217)	13.2% (n = 27/204)	27.4% (n = 113/412)	26.1% (n = 83/318)	11.7% (n = 7/60)	21.9% (n = 7/32)
	6–9 times	9.6% (n = 22/229)	8.7% (n = 158/1,824)	9.2% (n = 39/424)	6.2% (n = 200/3,217)	4.4% (n = 9/204)	8.7% (n = 36/412)	6.3% (n = 20/318)	3.3% (n = 2/60)	6.3% (n = 2/32)
	10+ times	20.1% (n = 46/229)	16.7% (n = 304/1,824)	17.2% (n = 73/424)	6.5% (n = 209/3,217)	2.9% (n = 6/204)	5.8% (n = 24/412)	3.8% (n = 12/318)	3.3% (n = 2/60)	9.4% (n = 3/32)
Provider/receiver	Student or former student	74.2% (n = 170/229)	73% (n = 1,332/1,824)	74.3% (n = 315/424)	69% (n = 2,219/3,217)	41.1% (n = 174/423)	66.7% (275/412)	78.9% (n = 251/318)	40% (n = 24/60)	50% (n = 16/32)
	Friend or family member	46.3% (n = 106/229)	51.6% (n = 941/1,824)	68.4% (n = 290/424)	67.4% (n = 2,169/3,217)	35% (n = 148/423)	69.6% (n = 287/412)	52.8% (n = 168/318)	71.6% (n = 43/60)	56.3% (n = 18/32)
	File-sharing website	31% (n = 71/229)	21.3% (n = 389/1,824)	2.8% (n = 12/424)	1.1% (n = 34/3,217)	2.8% (n = 12/423)	–	–	–	–
	Professional service	25.8% (n = 59/229)	11.5% (n = 210/1,824)	16.1% (n = 68/424)	9.2% (n = 295/3,217)	7% (n = 30/423)	1.5% (n = 6/412)	5.3% (n = 17/318)	6.7% (n = 4/60)	18.8% (n = 6/32)
	Partner or girl/boy friend	14% (n = 32/229)	8.4% (n = 153/1,824)	19.6% (n = 83/424)	14.9% (n = 478/3,217)	6.1% (n = 26/423)	6.1% (n = 25/412)	7.5% (n = 24/318)	16.7% (n = 10/60)	15.6% (n = 5/32)
Money exchanged	Yes	–	–	6.4% (n = 27/424)	1.6% (n = 51/3,217)	13.3% (n = 38/286)	3.4% (n = 14/411)	2.8% (n = 9/317)	16.7% (n = 10/60)	10% (n = 3/30)

What are university students’ experiences with contract cheating and other forms of outsourcing?

Last paragraph,

For each cheating behaviour, a majority of the Cheating Group reported engaging in unauthorised assistance with current/former students (from 40% to 78.9%), and friends or family members (from 35% to 71.6%). A small proportion of the Cheating Group reporting using/providing a professional service. Professional services were most commonly used by students who arranged for someone to take their exam for them (18.8% of that group), and by students obtaining a completed assignment for the purpose of submitting it as their own (7% of that group). Students reported the exchange of money in a relatively small number of cases across the five cheating behaviours (from 2.8% to 16.7%), with payment most common in cases where students took an exam for someone else.

The authors apologise for these errors.