Convenience Theory

Students may have a self-concept of themselves in which they consider themselves as being “bad students” rather than being “good students.” Students that considers themselves “good students” may be insulated against the temptation to cheat, where as, students who consider themselves “bad students” may succumb to the convenient, cheating path to good grades.

For some students, the role of student may not be a part of their role repertoire (role theory by Friday). They may be unable or unwilling to accept the role of student. They may resort to cheating as way to play the role of student the way they perceive it should be played, not the way it should be played.

As explained in Section 1, neutralization and rationalization play an important part in college student cheating. They make it more convenient for students to justify cheating in their own minds.

Students with strong internal and external controls may be able to resist cheating more than students with weak controls (Reiss and Nye's internal and external control theory). If punishment (a direct control) has not been effective in preventing cheating, students may cheat. If students have not been appropriately rewarded for not cheating, they may cheat. If the fear of parents' disappointment (indirect control) does not control students' behavior, they may cheat. And, if their sense of guilt (internal control) is not strong enough, they may cheat. Students with high self-control will be less likely to engage in cheating or any other criminal act (Gottfredson and Hirschi's self-control theory).