Paedagogie

Articles

Analisis Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa dalam Kajian Teori Fraud Hexagon

Sevira Ananditya , Ratieh Widhiastuti

Published
19 June 2026

Vol. 21 No. 2 (2026)
Pages 2525-2542

DOI

Open Access
Share

Abstract

This study aims to examine the influence of the fraud hexagon on academic fraud among students in the Faculty of Economics and Business at Universitas Negeri Semarang, Class of 2024. This study employs a quantitative method using a questionnaire in the form of a Google Form distributed via personal and group chats. The sampling technique selected was proportional random sampling to ensure that each department was proportionally represented, resulting in a sample of 322 students. Instrument validation was conducted using validity and reliability tests to ensure the quality of the indicators used. Data analysis was performed using descriptive statistical analysis and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) based on Partial Least Squares (PLS). The results of the study indicate that the variables of pressure, rationalization, and arrogance do not influence student academic fraud, while the variables of opportunity, ability, and collusion do influence student academic fraud. The recommendation from this study is that the university should strengthen its monitoring system and minimize opportunities for academic fraud, as well as channel students’ potential toward more positive directions to curb academic fraud.

Keywords

Fraud Hexagon; Academic Fraud; College Students

References

  1. drianus, Billy, Yuliati, R., & Adelina, Y. E. (2019). Kecurangan Akademik Pada Mahasiswa Akuntansi Berdasarkan Perspektif Fraud Diamond. Ekspansi: Jurnal Ekonomi, Keuangan, Perbankan Dan Akuntansi, 11(2), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.35313/ekspansi.v11i2.1346
  2. Affandi, A., Hakim, T. I. R., & Prasetyono. (2022). Dimensi Fraud Hexagon dan Spiritualitas Pada Kecurangan Akademik Selama Pembelajaran Daring. Infestasi, 18(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21107/infestasi.v18i1.14605 A
  3. Agustin, C. R., & Achyani, F. (2022). Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Hexagon terhadap Academic Fraud. Prosiding National Seminar on Accounting, Finance, and Economics (NSAFE), 2(1), 295–309.
  4. Akib, M., Sari, I. M., Mirosea, N., & Ashari, R. (2023). Fraud triangle dimensions on academic fraud behavior. JPPI (Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Indonesia), 9(3), 1205–1214. https://doi.org/10.29210/020232112
  5. Alfian, N., & Rahayu, R. P. (2021). Pengaruh fraud pentagon terhadap perilaku…. AKTIVA Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Investasi, 6(1), 60–75.
  6. Budiman, N. A. (2018). Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa: Dimensi Fraud Diamond dan Gone Theory. Akuntabilitas, 11(1), 75–90. https://doi.org/10.15408/akt.v11i1.8135
  7. Christiana, A., Kristiani, A., & Pangestu, S. (2021). Online Learning Dishonesty At the Beginning of the Covid-19 Pandemic: Fraud Pentagon. Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Indonesia, 19(1), 66–83.
  8. Dewa, M. M. C., & Maulana, A. (2024). Jurnal Riset Akuntansi dan Keuangan Hexagon Fraud : Exploration of Academic Fraud in Accounting Students at Universities in Java , Indonesia. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 12(2), 933–948. https://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/JRAK/
  9. Fadersair, K., & Subagyo, S. (2019). Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa Akuntansi : Dimensi Fraud Pentagon (Studi Kasus Pada Mahasiswa Prodi Akuntansi Ukrida). Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis, 12(2), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.30813/jab.v12i2.1786
  10. Gautama, S. R., Hakim, T. I. R., & Muhammad, E. (2023). Interaksi Dark Triad dan Fraud Hexagon: Perspektif Kecurangan Akademik. Reviu Akuntansi Dan Bisnis Indonesia, 7(2), 442–463. https://doi.org/10.18196/rabin.v7i2.19807
  11. Hariri, Pradana, A. W. S., & Rahman, F. (2018). Mendeteksi perilaku kecurangan akademik dengan perspektif. Jurnal Ketahanan Pangan, 2(1), 1–11.
  12. Islam, M. F., & Jatmika, S. (2024). Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Hexagon terhadap Kecurangan Akademik Peserta Didik di SMK. G-COUNS: Jurnal Bimbingan Dan Konseling, 8(2), 1012–1026.
  13. Mark, J. (2011). The Mind Behind the Fraudsters Crime: Key Behavioral and Environmental Elements. Crowe Horwath LLP, 1–62.
  14. Murdiansyah, I., Sudarma, M., & Nurkholis. (2017). Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Diamond Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik (Studi Empiris pada Mahasiswa Magister Akuntansi Universitas Brawijaya). Akuntansi Aktual, 4(2), 121–133. http://journal.um.ac.id/index.php/jaa
  15. Nailah, Z., & Murtanto, M. (2023). The Effect Of Hexagon Fraud Dimensions And Abuse Of Information Technology On Academic Fraud (Case Study On Feb Students Of Trisakti University). Jurnal Ekonomi, Manajemen, Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 4(4), 1123–1134. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.53697/emak.v4i4
  16. Novitaningrum, & Nurkhin, A. (2022). Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Diamond Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik. JPAK: Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Dan Keuangan, 10(2), 199–214. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17509/jpak.v10i2.43560
  17. Nurhalisa, S., & Fauzan, S. (2024). Penggunaan Fraud Pentagon Theory Untuk Mengidentifikasi. 5(2), 187–216. https://doi.org/10.15294/baej.v5i2.10671
  18. Nurkhin, A., & Fachrurrozie. (2018). Analisis Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Diamond Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa Pendidikan Akuntansi Unnes. Liabilities Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi, 1(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30596/ljpa.v1i1.2026
  19. Pamungkas, D. D. (2015). Pengaruh Faktor-Faktor Dalam Dimensi Fraud Triangle Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Siswa Kelas XI Akuntansi Smk Negeri 1 Tempel Tahun Ajaran 2014/2015.
  20. Pavela, G. (1997). Applying the power of association on campus: A model code of academic integrity. Journal of College and University Law, 24(1), 1–22. http://www.academicintegrity.org/icai/assets/model_code.pdf
  21. Persulessy, G., Mediaty, M., & Pontoh, G. T. (2022). Triangle’s Fraud Theory On Academic Fraud Behaviour When Online Learning. Journal of Professional Business Review, 7(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i6.e768
  22. Pratiwi, N. A. S., & Munari. (2024). Dimensi Fraud Hexagon Dalam Mempengaruhi Kecurangan Akademik Pada Mahasiswa Akuntansi. Jambura Economic Education Journal, 6(3), 455–468.
  23. Rahman, A., Deliana, Syahputra, R., Listrioni, & Ghavira, M. (2023). Prediction Academic Fraud of Accounting Students With Diamond Fraud Analysis. Kajian Akuntansi, 24(1), 116–135. https://ejournal.unisba.ac.id/index.php/kajian_akuntansi/article/view/11406
  24. Sari, D. E., Asila, N. F., Mustofa, R. H., Suranto, Jatmika, S., Ahmad, N. L., Setianingrum, S., & Fadhilah, R. (2025). Using the Fraud Triangle framework to explore the impact of information technology misuse on academic fraud in accounting education: evidence from Indonesia. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2476302
  25. Siswoko, D. B., & Budiwitjaksono, G. S. (2025). Pengaruh Fraud Hexagon dan Orientasi Tujuan Mahasiswa Terhadap Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa Akuntansi. PERMANA: Jurnal Perpajakan, Manajemen, Dan Akuntansi, 17(3), 248–263. http://permana.upstegal.ac.id/index.php/permana
  26. Sugiyono. (2016). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R &Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif Dan R & D. In Bandung:Alfabeta.
  27. Suryaningsih, L., & Siswandari. (2024). Pengaruh Dimensi Fraud Hexagon dan Prokrastinasi Akademik Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik pada Mahasiswa FKIP UNS. Tata Arta, 10(2), 179–191.
  28. Sutton, A., & Taylor, D. (2011). Confusion about Collusion: working together and academic integrity, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 831–841.
  29. Tameno, M. L., Muskanan, M. W., & Angi, Y. F. (2025). Pengaruh Fraud Hexagon terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik Mahasiswa Akuntansi di Kota Kupang. Jurnal Mahasiswa Manajemen Dan Akuntansi, 4(1), 368–386. https://doi.org/10.30640/jumma45.v4i1.4654
  30. Theotama, G., Waskita, Y. D., & Hapsari, A. N. S. (2023). Fraud hexagon in the motives to commit academic fraud. Jurnal Ekonomi Dan Bisnis, 26(1), 195–220. https://doi.org/10.24914/jeb.v26i1.7395
  31. Tonasa, M., & Setyorini, achristina T. (2019). Reasons For Accounting Students To Commit Academic Fraud: Qualitative Interview Studies. Jurnal Akuntansi, Manajemen, Dan Ekonomi, 21(1), 23–31. http://jos.unsoed.ac.id/index.php/jame/article/view/1431/1011
  32. Verdiana, E., & Mudrikah, S. (2023). Pengaruh Fraud Diamond Terhadap Kecurangan Akademik Dimoderasi Oleh Religiusitas Mahasiswa Pendidikan Ekonomi Universitas Negeri Semarang. Business and Accounting Education Journal, 4(1), 47–72. https://doi.org/10.15294/baej.v4i1.67913
  33. Vousinas, G. L. (2019). Advancing theory of fraud: the S.C.O.R.E. model. Journal of Financial Crime, 26(1), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFC-12-2017-0128
  34. Warni, P., & Margunani, M. (2022). Pengaruh Dimensi dalam Fraud Diamond dan Penyalahgunaan Teknologi Informasi Terhadap Perilaku Kecurangan Akademik. Business and Accounting Education Journal, 3(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.15294/baej.v3i1.59275
  35. Wolfe, D. T., & Hermanson, D. R. (2004). The Fraud Diamond: Considering Four Elements of Fraud. CPA Journal, 74(12), 38–42.
  36. Zamzam, I., Mahdi, S., & Ansar, R. (2017). Pengaruh diamond fraud dan tingkat religiuitas terhadap kecurangan akademik (studi pada mahasiswa S-1 di lingkungan perguruan tinggi se kota Ternate). Akuntansi Peradaban, 3(2), 1–24.
Article Metrics
24
Views
27
Downloads

SCITE

DIMENSIONS

Publication Information
Published 19 June 2026
Section Articles
Copyright Copyright (c) 2026 Paedagogie
Keywords
  • Fraud Hexagon
  • Academic Fraud
  • College Students