Penalties for Plagiarism and Cheating

Psychology Department Penalties for Academic Integrity Violations

Plagiarism, cheating, and misuse of generative AI tools will not be tolerated. It is the student’s responsibility to understand what constitutes academic dishonesty. Please carefully read the section on academic integrity in the university calendar, which includes definitions of plagiarism and cheating. Plagiarism consists of presenting another person’s ideas as if they were your own. If you are quoting directly from a source, you must place the extract in quotation marks, and give a precise reference to the source, including a page number. Direct quotes should be used only sparingly. If you get an idea or some information from an external source, but then present those ideas in your own words, you must still provide a reference to the book, article, or website from which the information originally came. A specific page number is not normally required if you are using your own words. Note that you cannot just change a word or two here and there; you must literally use your own words. The library also has a tutorial on how to avoid plagiarism. It is highly recommended that you complete this tutorial: https://library.acadiau.ca/research/tutorials/you-quote-it-you-note-it-2.html.

Please also carefully read the departmental policy below.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Academic Work

The use of Generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini) is not permitted in course work unless explicitly allowed by the course instructor. Course policies on Generative AI will be clearly stated in each course syllabus, including appropriate use cases (if any). The misuse of AI tools (i.e., any use not explicitly permitted in a course by instructors) will constitute an academic integrity violation, with penalties aligned to those for cheating or plagiarism.

The Psychology Department Policy on Cheating and Plagiarism

In accordance with the Senate Procedures Concerning Infractions of Academic Integrity, when the Head determines a violation of academic integrity has occurred in academic course work, the following procedures/penalties shall be applied.

A first offence will result in one or more of the following, depending on the circumstances of the offense:
o    A written warning
o    An educational assignment (e.g., 1-page reflection on plagiarism)
o    A reduction in the mark on the assignment
o    A mark of zero on the assignment
o    If the assignment is worth less than 5% of the overall grade, a reduction in the overall course mark of up to 5%

A second offence (confirmed by the Registrar) will result in a grade of zero for the psychology course

More than two offences will result in referral to the Dean for determination of appropriate sanction, which may involve removal from the academic program

Determining Penalties for First Violations

When assigning a penalty for a student’s first violation of the Academic Integrity Policy, the severity of the penalty may vary depending on the circumstances of the violation. The Head will consider the following qualities when assigning a penalty:

o    Did the student understand (or ought to have understood) the Instructor’s and Department’s expectations related to Academic Integrity?
o    Is there evidence that the violation was made knowingly to gain advantage?
o    Is there evidence that the student actively attempted to conceal their violation of the policy?
o    Does the violation negatively impact other students or the wider University community?

Investigation of Concerns Related to Academic Integrity

As per the Senate Policy on Academic Integrity, if an instructor has concerns that academic integrity has been violated, they will meet with the student to discuss this concern. After this meeting, if the instructor still believes that there has been a probable violation of academic integrity, they will organize a second meeting between the student, the instructor, and the Department Head.  The student and instructor will each be given an opportunity to provide supporting documentation to the Head and will be invited to bring an advocate with them to the meeting. The Head will confirm in advance whether any party (student or instructor) plans to bring an advocate to the meeting, and all meeting participants will be informed of who will be in attendance in advance of the meeting whenever possible.

Reporting and Records

Details of suspected violations of academic integrity are confidential between the student, the academic staff making the report, and the Department Head.  All substantiated violations of academic integrity will be reported to the Registrar and recorded in the Registry of Previous Infractions. The Registry of Previous Infractions is not accessible by the Psychology Department, but the number of previous infractions (if any) will be communicated to the Head if they determine that academic integrity has been violated. The Psychology Department also uses an internal reporting form to keep track of processes related to academic integrity; these records will be kept by the Department Head for internal documentation.

Academic Integrity in Thesis Work (Undergraduate or Master’s)

Thesis projects are substantive, high-value academic works that are intended to showcase the abilities of high-performing students in our department.  These research projects, especially those involving human participants, must be held to the high standard described by Acadia’s Research Ethics Board and the Canadian Psychological Association’s Code of Ethics.  Further, these academic works are shared publicly through the thesis repository, and thereby reflect on the student, their supervisor, and the wider university.  Given all of the above, any violation of academic integrity in a thesis project, including misuse of Generative AI tools, will be considered a serious offense.

Generative AI in Thesis Work (Undergraduate or Master’s)

As per the wider academic integrity policy, the use of Generative AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini) is not permitted in thesis work unless explicitly allowed by the thesis supervisor.  Acceptable use cases for Generative AI (if any) should be discussed with supervisors prior to their use, and in consultation with the Research Ethics Board and the wider department.

If the use of Generative AI is allowed by an individual supervisor, these tools should only be used in a limited capacity that supports overall learning.  Generative AI should never be used to create or replace any substantive portion of the thesis project (e.g., idea generation, research, writing, data generation, interpretation).  Examples of acceptable use cases may include guidance for improving sentence clarity, checking for spelling and grammar errors, or formatting reference lists.

Students must declare if Generative AI was used in the acknowledgements section of their thesis.  This acknowledgement should include which tools were used and in what context, as well as a statement of personal responsibility for the accuracy of provided information.  Examples of such a statement might include:

o In the preparation of this thesis project, the author used ChatGPT 4, a Generative AI model, to assist with reviewing grammar and sentence structure.  The author has reviewed and edited all content produced by Generative AI and takes full responsibility for the content of this project

o No Generative AI tools were used in the preparation of this thesis project.