Professors may be unwitting participants in cheating (Miethe and Meier). A professor who does not provide proper guardianship during an exam may make cheating more convenient for some students. Actions such as leaving exams exposed in unlocked offices may make professors unwitting participants.
Professors may be unwilling or unable to assume the role of guardian during exams (Friday's role repertoire). If a university’s academic dishonesty regulations are ambiguous, professors may avoid dealing with them. Professors may fear that complex legal proceedings will hurt their reputations so they may overlook cheating. Some professors may disagree with the penalties for cheating so they may be hesitant to enforce rules against cheating.
The same theories that explain the factors that contribute to a motivated offender can also be used to explain the factors that contribute to making a suitable target. These theories are discussed in more detail in the subsection that explains the development of convenience theory, starting on page 20. All these factors can work together to make certain professors more suitable targets for cheating. This, along with the proper social context, may make a motivated student feel that cheating is the convenient path to a good grade.