research-article

Assessing the usability of smartwatches for academic cheating during exams

Authors:

Stephanie Wong,

Bernhard Riecke,

Carman NeustaedterAuthors Info & Claims

MobileHCI '17: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

Article No.: 31, Pages 1 - 11

https://doi.org/10.1145/3098279.3098568

Published: 04 September 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Smartwatches are growing in usage, yet they come with the additional challenge of regulating their usage during the taking of academic tests. However, it is unclear how effective they are at actually allowing students to cheat. We conducted an experiment that examines the use of smartwatches for cheating on Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQ) and Short Answers (SA) with either Pictures/Text shown on the watch to aid students. Our results indicate that smartwatches are neither efficient nor have a high usability rating for cheating. However, students are able to score higher on Multiple-Choice Questions compared to Short Answers. We use the cheating paradigm as an example to understand the perceived usability and appropriation of smartwatches in an academic setting. We provide suggestions that help to deter cheating in an academic setting. Our study contributes to the research on academic integrity and the growing demand of wearable technologies.

References

[1]

24kupi. 2017. Buy Cheating Watches for Easy Studying, exams and tests. Retrieved January 26, 2017 from https://www.24kupi.com/webshopen/?_____store=default&_____from_store=default

[2]

Deepak Akkil, Jari Kangas, Jussi Rantala, Poika Isokoski, Oleg Spakov, and Roope Raisamo. 2015. Glance Awareness and Gaze Interaction in Smartwatches. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '15), 1271--1276.

Digital Library

[3]

Peter Ashworth, Philip Bannister, Pauline Thorne, and Students on the Qualitative Research Methods Course Unit. 1997. Guilty in whose eyes? University students' perceptions of cheating and plagiarism in academic work and assessment. Studies in Higher Education 22, 2: 187--203.

[4]

Mebratu Mulatu Bachore. 2014. Academic Dishonesty/Corruption in the Period of Technology: Its implication for Quality of Education. American Journal of Educational Research, American Journal of Educational Research 2, 11: 1060--1064.

[5]

J. A. Ballantine, P. McCourt Larres, and M. Mulgrew. 2014. Determinants of academic cheating behavior: The future for accountancy in Ireland. Accounting Forum 38, 1: 55--66.

[6]

Christopher Bearman, Susannah B. F. Paletz, Judith Orasanu, and Matthew J. W. Thomas. 2010. The Breakdown of Coordinated Decision Making in Distributed Systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 52, 2: 173--188.

[7]

Gerald Bieber, Thomas Kirste, and Bodo Urban. 2012. Ambient Interaction by Smart Watches. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA '12), 39:1--39:6.

Digital Library

[8]

Marta E. Cecchinato, Anna L. Cox, and Jon Bird. 2015. Smartwatches: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly? In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '15), 2133--2138.

Digital Library

[9]

Xiang "Anthony" Chen, Tovi Grossman, and George Fitzmaurice. 2014. Swipeboard: A Text Entry Technique for Ultra-small Interfaces That Supports Novice to Expert Transitions. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '14), 615--620.

Digital Library

[10]

Gregory J. Cizek. 1999. Cheating on Tests: How To Do It, Detect It, and Prevent It. Routledge, Mahwah, N.J.

[11]

Gareth Denyer and Dale Hancock. 2012. Multiple choice questions to combat plagiarism and encourage conceptual learning. Proceedings of The Australian Conference on Science and Mathematics Education (formerly UniServe Science Conference) 0, 0. Retrieved December 13, 2016 from http://openjournals.library.usyd.edu.au/index.php/IISME/article/view/6380

[12]

Steven M. Downing. 2002. Threats to the Validity of Locally Developed Multiple-Choice Tests in Medical Education: Construct-Irrelevant Variance and Construct Underrepresentation. Advances in Health Sciences Education 7, 3: 235--241.

[13]

Jean H. D. Fasel. 1998. Teaching of gross anatomy to medical undergraduates: general practice as a guideline? A synopsis. Journal of Anatomy 192, Pt 2: 305--306.

[14]

Kraig Finstad. 2010. The Usability Metric for User Experience. Interacting with Computers 22, 5: 323--327.

Digital Library

[15]

Megan-Jane Johnstone. 2016. Academic Dishonesty and Unethical Behaviour in the Workplace. Australian Nursing & Midwifery Journal 23, 11: 33--33.

[16]

A. Komninos and M. Dunlop. 2014. Text Input on a Smart Watch. IEEE Pervasive Computing 13, 4: 50--58.

[17]

Philip Kortum. 2008. HCI Beyond the GUI: Design for Haptic, Speech, Olfactory, and Other Nontraditional Interfaces. Morgan Kaufmann.

Digital Library

[18]

Rebekah D. LaDuke. 2013. Academic Dishonesty Today, Unethical Practices Tomorrow? Journal of Professional Nursing 29, 6: 402--406.

[19]

McCabe DL. 2009. Academic dishonesty in nursing schools: an empirical investigation. Journal of Nursing Education 48, 11: 614--623.

[20]

Robert S. Mccuskey, Stephen W. Carmichael, and Darrell G. Kirch. Article The Importance of Anatomy in Health Professions Education and the Shortage of Qualified Educators.

[21]

Alex Migicovsky, Zakir Durumeric, Jeff Ringenberg, and J. Alex Halderman. 2014. Outsmarting Proctors with Smartwatches: A Case Study on Wearable Computing Security. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security, Nicolas Christin and Reihaneh Safavi-Naini (eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 89--96.

[22]

Vivian Genaro Motti and Kelly Caine. 2016. Smart Wearables or Dumb Wearables?: Understanding How Context Impacts the UX in Wrist Worn Interaction. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication (SIGDOC '16), 10:1--10:10.

Digital Library

[23]

Michael Nebeling, Alexandra To, Anhong Guo, Adrian A. de Freitas, Jaime Teevan, Steven P. Dow, and Jeffrey P. Bigham. 2016. WearWrite: Crowd-Assisted Writing from Smartwatches. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16), 3834--3846.

Digital Library

[24]

Stephen Oney, Chris Harrison, Amy Ogan, and Jason Wiese. 2013. ZoomBoard: A Diminutive Qwerty Soft Keyboard Using Iterative Zooming for Ultra-small Devices. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 2799--2802.

Digital Library

[25]

Eun-Jun Park, Seungmi Park, and In-Sun Jang. 2013. Academic cheating among nursing students. Nurse Education Today 33, 4: 346--352.

[26]

Simon T. Perrault, Eric Lecolinet, James Eagan, and Yves Guiard. 2013. Watchit: Simple Gestures and Eyes-free Interaction for Wristwatches and Bracelets. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '13), 1451--1460.

Digital Library

[27]

Cornelius B. Pratt and Gerald W. McLaughlin. 1989. An Analysis of Predictors of College Students' Ethical Inclinations. Research in Higher Education 30, 2: 195--219.

[28]

Jakob Rodgers. 2012. AFA discovered cheating by comparing online, final exams. Colorado Springs Gazette. Retrieved February 6, 2017 from http://gazette.com/afa-discovered-cheating-by-comparing-online-final-exams/article/139894

[29]

Cristóbal Romero, Rebeca Cerezo, Jose Antonio Espino, and Manuel Bermudez. 2016. Using Android Wear for Avoiding Procrastination Behaviours in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '16), 193--196.

Digital Library

[30]

Sapa-AFP. 2012. Cops expose exam cheating ring in Bangladesh. The M&G Online. Retrieved December 1, 2016 from http://mg.co.za/article/2012-10-23-pupils-in-bangladesh-should-get-full-marks-for-innovative-way-of-cheating-during-exams/

[31]

Jeff Sauro. 2011. A Practical Guide to the System Usability Scale: Background, Benchmarks & Best Practices. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

[32]

Hassan Sami Shaibah and Cees P. M. van der Vleuten. 2013. The validity of multiple choice practical examinations as an alternative to traditional free response examination formats in gross anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education 6, 3: 149--156.

[33]

Judy Sheard and Martin Dick. 2012. Directions and Dimensions in Managing Cheating and Plagiarism of IT Students. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Australasian Computing Education Conference - Volume 123 (ACE '12), 177--186. Retrieved November 30, 2016 from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2483716.2483737

Digital Library

[34]

Thomas Tullis and William Albert. 2010. Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics. Morgan Kaufmann.

Digital Library

[35]

Maureen Wideman. 2011. Caring or collusion? Academic dishonesty in a school of nursing. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education; Toronto 41, 2: 28--43.

[36]

Robert Xiao, Gierad Laput, and Chris Harrison. 2014. Expanding the Input Expressivity of Smartwatches with Mechanical Pan, Twist, Tilt and Click. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '14), 193--196.

Digital Library

[37]

2016. Phone and Electronic Device Policy. SAT Suite of Assessments. Retrieved December 1, 2016 from https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/taking-the-test/phone-electronic-device-policy

Cited By

Noorbehbahani FMohammadi AAminazadeh M(2022)A systematic review of research on cheating in online exams from 2010 to 2021Education and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-10927-727:6(8413-8460)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10927-7
Heya TSerwadda AGriswold-Steiner IMatovu R(2021)A Wearables-Driven Attack on Examination Proctoring2021 18th International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST)10.1109/PST52912.2021.9647760(1-7)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/PST52912.2021.9647760
Doerr K(2021)Testing and cheating: technologies of power and resistanceCultural Studies of Science Education10.1007/s11422-021-10048-6Online publication date: 20-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10048-6
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Assessing the usability of smartwatches for academic cheating during exams
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Collaborative and social computing

Recommendations

Categorization Framework for Usability Issues of Smartwatches and Pedometers for the Older Adults
Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Methods, Technologies, and Users
Abstract
In recent years various usability issues related to device characteristics of quantified-self wearables such as smartwatches and pedometers have been identified which appear likely to impact device adoption among the older adults. However, an ...
The Influence of Menu Structure and Layout on Usability of Smartwatches

This study aims to investigate the effect of smartwatches' menu structure and layout on user performance and satisfaction. A total of 30 younger and older adults participated in this study. Usability testing was first conducted, and it identified the two ...
Visual secret sharing with cheating prevention revisited

Visual secret sharing (VSS) is a variant form of secret sharing, and is efficient since secret decoding only depends on the human vision system. However, cheating in VSS, first showed by Horng et al., is a significant issue like a limelight. Since then, ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

MobileHCI '17: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

September 2017

874 pages

ISBN:9781450350754

DOI:10.1145/3098279

General Chairs:
Matt Jones
Swansea University
,
Manfred Tscheligi
University of Salzburg and AIT
,
Program Chairs:
Yvonne Rogers
University College London
,
Roderick Murray-Smith
University of Glasgow

Copyright © 2017 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 September 2017

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

MobileHCI '17

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

MobileHCI '17: 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

September 4 - 7, 2017

Vienna, Austria

Acceptance Rates

MobileHCI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 45 of 224 submissions, 20%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 202 of 906 submissions, 22%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

6
Total Citations
View Citations
400
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)35
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 18 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Noorbehbahani FMohammadi AAminazadeh M(2022)A systematic review of research on cheating in online exams from 2010 to 2021Education and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-10927-727:6(8413-8460)Online publication date: 7-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10927-7
Heya TSerwadda AGriswold-Steiner IMatovu R(2021)A Wearables-Driven Attack on Examination Proctoring2021 18th International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST)10.1109/PST52912.2021.9647760(1-7)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/PST52912.2021.9647760
Doerr K(2021)Testing and cheating: technologies of power and resistanceCultural Studies of Science Education10.1007/s11422-021-10048-6Online publication date: 20-Apr-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10048-6
Carrillo-Avalos BSánchez Mendiola MLeenen I(2020)Amenazas a la validez en evaluación: implicaciones en educación médicaInvestigación en Educación Médica10.22201/facmed.20075057e.2020.34.221(100-107)Online publication date: 1-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.22201/facmed.20075057e.2020.34.221
Motti V(2019)Wearable Technologies in Education: A Design SpaceLearning and Collaboration Technologies. Ubiquitous and Virtual Environments for Learning and Collaboration10.1007/978-3-030-21817-1_5(55-67)Online publication date: 15-Jun-2019
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21817-1_5
Al-Megren S(2018)A Predictive Fingerstroke-Level Model for Smartwatch InteractionMultimodal Technologies and Interaction10.3390/mti20300382:3(38)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2018
https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2030038

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents