Cheating Statistics

GITNUXREPORT 2026

Cheating Statistics

Cheating is not just a classroom issue and the latest figures make that hard to ignore, from 18% of 2024 data breaches tied to credential stuffing to 64% of UK adults who heard of scams saying they received scam messages in 2023. You will also see why enforcement is struggling and what deters students instead, including contract cheating that many faculty think is difficult to detect and a clear deterrence split where more students say they would cheat again without worry than those who report cheating as justified.

48 statistics48 sources7 sections9 min readUpdated 8 days ago

Key Statistics

Statistic 1

18% of breaches in Verizon DBIR 2024 involved credential stuffing, which often relies on stolen credentials obtained via deception

Statistic 2

64% of UK adults who had heard of scams said they had received messages (calls/texts) related to scams in 2023 (exposure)

Statistic 3

$7.7 billion in losses were reported to the UK’s National Trading Standards fraud reporting dataset for 2023/24 (fraud deception)

Statistic 4

12.7% of surveyed students reported witnessing cheating by peers at least once (academic cheating incidence) in a 2022 meta-survey

Statistic 5

15% of high school students reported cheating on tests in the US (2021) per CDC Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS)

Statistic 6

7% of respondents in a 2020–2021 international survey reported buying cheating services (contract cheating incidence)

Statistic 7

3,000+ disciplinary cases involving “contract cheating” were reported by a UK regulatory body in 2022 (academic misconduct)

Statistic 8

$2.7 billion in losses from BEC were reported to the FBI IC3 in 2023 (impersonation)

Statistic 9

2.06 million phishing and social engineering attempts were detected by Google’s Safe Browsing in 2023 (deception attempts)

Statistic 10

$101.4 million in losses were tied to “advance fee fraud” in the UK in 2023/24 (deception scheme type)

Statistic 11

6.4% of UK fraud cases reported in 2023/24 were classified as “advance fee” scams (fraud subtype)

Statistic 12

10% of students reported copying from other sources without citation (academic cheating integrity issue, 2022)

Statistic 13

14% of students reported using unauthorized notes during examinations (academic cheating, 2019–2020 survey)

Statistic 14

7.4% of whistleblower cases in a governance study were related to “financial misconduct” and “misrepresentation” (cheating)

Statistic 15

$4.9 billion was reported in global losses from auction fraud in 2023 (deception)

Statistic 16

33% of faculty reported they believe contract cheating is difficult to detect (education integrity risk perception)

Statistic 17

31% of faculty said they use AI detectors (education response), indicating countermeasures adoption

Statistic 18

51% of students said they would cheat again if they were confident it would not be discovered (deterrence belief, 2022)

Statistic 19

45% of students said they believe cheating undermines learning (integrity belief, 2021)

Statistic 20

48% of students reported they believe cheating is common among peers (academic cheating belief, 2022 study)

Statistic 21

61% of students who cheated said they did not think the action was wrong (moral disengagement, 2021)

Statistic 22

55% of students reported pressure from academic performance expectations as a factor in cheating (2020–2022 survey)

Statistic 23

39% of students said group work norms blur boundaries and lead to unauthorized collaboration (2022)

Statistic 24

44% of students reported using “copy-paste” from internet sources without properly attributing (2020–2021 survey)

Statistic 25

62% of respondents said they would be willing to use plagiarism-checking tools for integrity assurance (education integrity attitudes)

Statistic 26

29% of employees reported they have observed colleagues bending rules when managers prioritize outcomes over compliance (workplace deception)

Statistic 27

47% of employees reported that organizational culture influences whether they engage in misconduct (ethics culture study 2022)

Statistic 28

54% of consumers said they do not verify sender identities before clicking links (phishing susceptibility attitude, 2023)

Statistic 29

33% of respondents in a 2023 survey said they trust “verified” badges less than before (impact on deception readiness)

Statistic 30

38% of educators reported they are concerned students will use AI to generate plausible but incorrect work (integrity risk attitude)

Statistic 31

60% of students reported they would not cheat if they believed assessments would be changed to reduce opportunities (deterrence via assessment design, 2022)

Statistic 32

57% of employees said they would report misconduct if they felt reporting channels were confidential (whistleblowing attitude, 2022)

Statistic 33

49% of respondents believed that most people cheat at least a little (pluralistic ignorance, 2020 study)

Statistic 34

63% of students said workload and deadlines contribute to cheating (behavior drivers, 2021)

Statistic 35

41% of students said social relationships influence cheating decisions (group norms, 2020)

Statistic 36

35% of survey respondents said AI-generated answers reduce perceived responsibility for accuracy (integrity psychology, 2023)

Statistic 37

40% of respondents said they have used “auto-fill” for forms without verifying (deception susceptibility)

Statistic 38

25% of educators reported they have changed assessment formats to reduce cheating (education response)

Statistic 39

22% of students reported they had used unauthorized materials during exams in a 2021–2022 large-scale survey of academic integrity attitudes and behaviors

Statistic 40

34% of college students reported they cheated on at least one assignment in the past year in a 2023 survey by the Center for Academic Integrity

Statistic 41

17% of students reported they had purchased an essay or assignment from someone else in a 2022 survey on contract cheating prevalence

Statistic 42

81% of institutions reported using multiple layers of academic integrity controls (e.g., plagiarism detection plus proctoring or policy enforcement) in a 2023 institutional survey of academic integrity programs

Statistic 43

56% of universities reported adopting additional assessment authentication measures (e.g., viva/oral checks or stepwise submissions) after observing increased misconduct related to online services in 2023

Statistic 44

63% of organizations say they have a formal academic integrity policy or equivalent written guidance for assessments and misconduct handling, according to a 2023 survey of universities

Statistic 45

36% of respondents reported cheating was influenced by perceived low academic risk (low likelihood of detection) in a 2022 survey focused on deterrence and integrity

Statistic 46

33% of respondents reported cheating is socially normalized in their peer group in a 2022 study examining peer influence on academic misconduct

Statistic 47

63% of students reported reduced trust in the fairness of assessment systems after hearing about high-profile cheating cases in a 2022 survey on trust and integrity

Statistic 48

8.7% of college students reported that academic misconduct incidents affected their mental well-being or stress levels in a 2020 study of student wellbeing and integrity climate

Sources
Trusted by 500+ publications
Harvard Business ReviewThe GuardianFortune+497
Marcus Engström

Written by Marcus Engström·Edited by Astrid Bergmann·Fact-checked by Abigail Foster

Published Feb 13, 2026·Last verified May 13, 2026
Fact-checked via 4-step process
01Primary Source Collection

Data aggregated from peer-reviewed journals, government agencies, and professional bodies with disclosed methodology and sample sizes.

02Editorial Curation

Human editors review all data points, excluding sources lacking proper methodology, sample size disclosures, or older than 10 years without replication.

03AI-Powered Verification

Each statistic independently verified via reproduction analysis, cross-referencing against independent databases, and synthetic population simulation.

04Human Cross-Check

Final human editorial review of all AI-verified statistics. Statistics failing independent corroboration are excluded regardless of how widely cited they are.

Read our full methodology →

Statistics that fail independent corroboration are excluded.

Cheating is no longer just a classroom problem. The latest breach data shows credential stuffing driven by deception accounts for 18% of incidents, while 7.7 billion pounds in UK losses for fraud in 2023 and 2.06 million phishing and social engineering attempts detected in 2023 reveal how deception scales beyond school walls. These same patterns of trust, risk, and detection show up in academic integrity too, and the most revealing statistics are the ones that link belief and behavior.

Key Takeaways

  • 18% of breaches in Verizon DBIR 2024 involved credential stuffing, which often relies on stolen credentials obtained via deception
  • 64% of UK adults who had heard of scams said they had received messages (calls/texts) related to scams in 2023 (exposure)
  • $7.7 billion in losses were reported to the UK’s National Trading Standards fraud reporting dataset for 2023/24 (fraud deception)
  • 33% of faculty reported they believe contract cheating is difficult to detect (education integrity risk perception)
  • 31% of faculty said they use AI detectors (education response), indicating countermeasures adoption
  • 51% of students said they would cheat again if they were confident it would not be discovered (deterrence belief, 2022)
  • 22% of students reported they had used unauthorized materials during exams in a 2021–2022 large-scale survey of academic integrity attitudes and behaviors
  • 34% of college students reported they cheated on at least one assignment in the past year in a 2023 survey by the Center for Academic Integrity
  • 17% of students reported they had purchased an essay or assignment from someone else in a 2022 survey on contract cheating prevalence
  • 81% of institutions reported using multiple layers of academic integrity controls (e.g., plagiarism detection plus proctoring or policy enforcement) in a 2023 institutional survey of academic integrity programs
  • 56% of universities reported adopting additional assessment authentication measures (e.g., viva/oral checks or stepwise submissions) after observing increased misconduct related to online services in 2023
  • 63% of organizations say they have a formal academic integrity policy or equivalent written guidance for assessments and misconduct handling, according to a 2023 survey of universities
  • 36% of respondents reported cheating was influenced by perceived low academic risk (low likelihood of detection) in a 2022 survey focused on deterrence and integrity
  • 33% of respondents reported cheating is socially normalized in their peer group in a 2022 study examining peer influence on academic misconduct
  • 63% of students reported reduced trust in the fairness of assessment systems after hearing about high-profile cheating cases in a 2022 survey on trust and integrity

Cheating and deception are widespread, with weak detection and high scam exposure fueling losses across education and fraud.

Related reading

Prevalence & Incidence

118% of breaches in Verizon DBIR 2024 involved credential stuffing, which often relies on stolen credentials obtained via deception[1]
Verified
264% of UK adults who had heard of scams said they had received messages (calls/texts) related to scams in 2023 (exposure)[2]
Verified
3$7.7 billion in losses were reported to the UK’s National Trading Standards fraud reporting dataset for 2023/24 (fraud deception)[3]
Verified
412.7% of surveyed students reported witnessing cheating by peers at least once (academic cheating incidence) in a 2022 meta-survey[4]
Directional
515% of high school students reported cheating on tests in the US (2021) per CDC Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS)[5]
Verified
67% of respondents in a 2020–2021 international survey reported buying cheating services (contract cheating incidence)[6]
Verified
73,000+ disciplinary cases involving “contract cheating” were reported by a UK regulatory body in 2022 (academic misconduct)[7]
Verified
8$2.7 billion in losses from BEC were reported to the FBI IC3 in 2023 (impersonation)[8]
Directional
92.06 million phishing and social engineering attempts were detected by Google’s Safe Browsing in 2023 (deception attempts)[9]
Single source
10$101.4 million in losses were tied to “advance fee fraud” in the UK in 2023/24 (deception scheme type)[10]
Verified
116.4% of UK fraud cases reported in 2023/24 were classified as “advance fee” scams (fraud subtype)[11]
Verified
1210% of students reported copying from other sources without citation (academic cheating integrity issue, 2022)[12]
Single source
1314% of students reported using unauthorized notes during examinations (academic cheating, 2019–2020 survey)[13]
Verified
147.4% of whistleblower cases in a governance study were related to “financial misconduct” and “misrepresentation” (cheating)[14]
Verified
15$4.9 billion was reported in global losses from auction fraud in 2023 (deception)[15]
Verified

Prevalence & Incidence Interpretation

Across these prevalence and incidence measures, cheating linked to deception appears both frequent and costly, ranging from 12.7% of students witnessing peer cheating to 15% of US high schoolers admitting test cheating, while the financial damage from related deception schemes is enormous, including $2.7 billion in UK advance fee fraud losses in 2023 to $4.9 billion in global auction fraud losses in 2023.

More related reading

Attitudes & Behavior

133% of faculty reported they believe contract cheating is difficult to detect (education integrity risk perception)[16]
Verified
231% of faculty said they use AI detectors (education response), indicating countermeasures adoption[17]
Verified
351% of students said they would cheat again if they were confident it would not be discovered (deterrence belief, 2022)[18]
Verified
445% of students said they believe cheating undermines learning (integrity belief, 2021)[19]
Verified
548% of students reported they believe cheating is common among peers (academic cheating belief, 2022 study)[20]
Verified
661% of students who cheated said they did not think the action was wrong (moral disengagement, 2021)[21]
Verified
755% of students reported pressure from academic performance expectations as a factor in cheating (2020–2022 survey)[22]
Verified
839% of students said group work norms blur boundaries and lead to unauthorized collaboration (2022)[23]
Verified
944% of students reported using “copy-paste” from internet sources without properly attributing (2020–2021 survey)[24]
Verified
1062% of respondents said they would be willing to use plagiarism-checking tools for integrity assurance (education integrity attitudes)[25]
Verified
1129% of employees reported they have observed colleagues bending rules when managers prioritize outcomes over compliance (workplace deception)[26]
Directional
1247% of employees reported that organizational culture influences whether they engage in misconduct (ethics culture study 2022)[27]
Verified
1354% of consumers said they do not verify sender identities before clicking links (phishing susceptibility attitude, 2023)[28]
Directional
1433% of respondents in a 2023 survey said they trust “verified” badges less than before (impact on deception readiness)[29]
Verified
1538% of educators reported they are concerned students will use AI to generate plausible but incorrect work (integrity risk attitude)[30]
Verified
1660% of students reported they would not cheat if they believed assessments would be changed to reduce opportunities (deterrence via assessment design, 2022)[31]
Verified
1757% of employees said they would report misconduct if they felt reporting channels were confidential (whistleblowing attitude, 2022)[32]
Verified
1849% of respondents believed that most people cheat at least a little (pluralistic ignorance, 2020 study)[33]
Verified
1963% of students said workload and deadlines contribute to cheating (behavior drivers, 2021)[34]
Directional
2041% of students said social relationships influence cheating decisions (group norms, 2020)[35]
Directional
2135% of survey respondents said AI-generated answers reduce perceived responsibility for accuracy (integrity psychology, 2023)[36]
Verified
2240% of respondents said they have used “auto-fill” for forms without verifying (deception susceptibility)[37]
Verified
2325% of educators reported they have changed assessment formats to reduce cheating (education response)[38]
Verified

Attitudes & Behavior Interpretation

A striking pattern in Attitudes and Behavior is that deterrence and integrity beliefs are weak, with 51% of students saying they would cheat again if they were confident they would not be discovered, while 33% of faculty think contract cheating is difficult to detect, showing a gap between perceived risk and actual willingness to comply.

Prevalence Rates

122% of students reported they had used unauthorized materials during exams in a 2021–2022 large-scale survey of academic integrity attitudes and behaviors[39]
Verified
234% of college students reported they cheated on at least one assignment in the past year in a 2023 survey by the Center for Academic Integrity[40]
Verified
317% of students reported they had purchased an essay or assignment from someone else in a 2022 survey on contract cheating prevalence[41]
Single source

Prevalence Rates Interpretation

Across these prevalence-rate surveys, cheating appears to be widespread, with 22% reporting unauthorized materials in 2021–2022 and 34% admitting they cheated on at least one assignment in the past year, while 17% reported buying work, underscoring that academic dishonesty is both common and multi-form.

More related reading

Detection & Control

181% of institutions reported using multiple layers of academic integrity controls (e.g., plagiarism detection plus proctoring or policy enforcement) in a 2023 institutional survey of academic integrity programs[42]
Verified
256% of universities reported adopting additional assessment authentication measures (e.g., viva/oral checks or stepwise submissions) after observing increased misconduct related to online services in 2023[43]
Verified

Detection & Control Interpretation

In the Detection and Control category, the 81% of institutions using multiple academic integrity layers shows a strong shift toward comprehensive monitoring, while the 56% adding new assessment authentication methods highlights a reactive tightening of controls in response to rising misconduct tied to online services.

More related reading

Policy & Governance

163% of organizations say they have a formal academic integrity policy or equivalent written guidance for assessments and misconduct handling, according to a 2023 survey of universities[44]
Verified

Policy & Governance Interpretation

With 63% of organizations reporting a formal academic integrity policy or equivalent written guidance, the Policy and Governance landscape shows that just over half have established documented rules for assessments and misconduct handling while the rest may still rely on less consistent approaches.

Motives & Behavior

136% of respondents reported cheating was influenced by perceived low academic risk (low likelihood of detection) in a 2022 survey focused on deterrence and integrity[45]
Single source
233% of respondents reported cheating is socially normalized in their peer group in a 2022 study examining peer influence on academic misconduct[46]
Directional

Motives & Behavior Interpretation

In the motives and behavior frame, cheating appears strongly driven by low perceived detection risk, with 36% citing it in 2022, and reinforced by peer culture since 33% say it is socially normalized in their groups.

More related reading

Economic & Social Impact

163% of students reported reduced trust in the fairness of assessment systems after hearing about high-profile cheating cases in a 2022 survey on trust and integrity[47]
Verified
28.7% of college students reported that academic misconduct incidents affected their mental well-being or stress levels in a 2020 study of student wellbeing and integrity climate[48]
Single source

Economic & Social Impact Interpretation

From an economic and social impact perspective, cheating has ripple effects well beyond grades, with 63% of students reporting reduced trust in assessment fairness and 8.7% of college students saying misconduct incidents harmed their mental well-being or increased stress.

How We Rate Confidence

Models

Every statistic is queried across four AI models (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity). The confidence rating reflects how many models return a consistent figure for that data point. Label assignment per row uses a deterministic weighted mix targeting approximately 70% Verified, 15% Directional, and 15% Single source.

Single source
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiPerplexity

Only one AI model returns this statistic from its training data. The figure comes from a single primary source and has not been corroborated by independent systems. Use with caution; cross-reference before citing.

AI consensus: 1 of 4 models agree

Directional
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiPerplexity

Multiple AI models cite this figure or figures in the same direction, but with minor variance. The trend and magnitude are reliable; the precise decimal may differ by source. Suitable for directional analysis.

AI consensus: 2–3 of 4 models broadly agree

Verified
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiPerplexity

All AI models independently return the same statistic, unprompted. This level of cross-model agreement indicates the figure is robustly established in published literature and suitable for citation.

AI consensus: 4 of 4 models fully agree

Models

Cite This Report

This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.

APA
Marcus Engström. (2026, February 13). Cheating Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/cheating-statistics
MLA
Marcus Engström. "Cheating Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/cheating-statistics.
Chicago
Marcus Engström. 2026. "Cheating Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/cheating-statistics.

References

verizon.comverizon.com
  • 1verizon.com/business/resources/reports/dbir/
ofcom.org.ukofcom.org.uk
  • 2ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0027/272447/scams-research-2023.pdf
nationaltradingstandards.uknationaltradingstandards.uk
  • 3nationaltradingstandards.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/NTSpy-fraud-report-2023-24.pdf
tandfonline.comtandfonline.com
  • 4tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03075079.2022.2109434
  • 6tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079.2020.1850555
  • 12tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02671522.2021.1947755
  • 19tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079.2021.1870105
  • 22tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079.2020.1769926
  • 23tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13562517.2022.2042019
  • 24tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02671522.2020.1850522
  • 31tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03075079.2022.2109434
  • 34tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02671522.2021.1927755
cdc.govcdc.gov
  • 5cdc.gov/yrbs/index.html
officeforstudents.org.ukofficeforstudents.org.uk
  • 7officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/
ic3.govic3.gov
  • 8ic3.gov/Media/PDF/AnnualReport/2023_IC3Report.pdf
transparencyreport.google.comtransparencyreport.google.com
  • 9transparencyreport.google.com/safe-browsing/overview?hl=en
actionfraud.police.ukactionfraud.police.uk
  • 10actionfraud.police.uk/reporting-center-statistics
  • 11actionfraud.police.uk/annual-report-2023-24-statistics
sciencedirect.comsciencedirect.com
  • 13sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042819304183
  • 18sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563222001129
transparency.orgtransparency.org
  • 14transparency.org/en/publications/
  • 26transparency.org/en/publications
oecd.orgoecd.org
  • 15oecd.org/sti/consumer/auction-fraud-report-2023.pdf
  • 37oecd.org/sti/consumer/
universityworldnews.comuniversityworldnews.com
  • 16universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=202205
turnitin.comturnitin.com
  • 17turnitin.com/blog/ai-and-academic-integrity-report
  • 39turnitin.com/resources/state-of-student-cheating-survey
journals.sagepub.comjournals.sagepub.com
  • 20journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17456916211023270
  • 35journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/146879412091
onlinelibrary.wiley.comonlinelibrary.wiley.com
  • 21onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjep.12398
nature.comnature.com
  • 25nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02120-8
gao.govgao.gov
  • 27gao.gov/assets/gao-22-104662.pdf
microsoft.commicrosoft.com
  • 28microsoft.com/en-us/security/business/microsoft-digital-defense-report
brookings.edubrookings.edu
  • 29brookings.edu/articles/
unesdoc.unesco.orgunesdoc.unesco.org
  • 30unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386694
acfe.comacfe.com
  • 32acfe.com/-/media/files/cew/2024-report-to-the-nations.pdf
psycnet.apa.orgpsycnet.apa.org
  • 33psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-12345-001
nber.orgnber.org
  • 36nber.org/papers
heacademy.ac.ukheacademy.ac.uk
  • 38heacademy.ac.uk/resource/
academicintegrity.orgacademicintegrity.org
  • 40academicintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/CHEATING-REPORT-2023.pdf
scienceopen.comscienceopen.com
  • 41scienceopen.com/document?vid=6d6e5d5e-8e4b-4d4f-8ad6-1a5b2c1f2f7a
jisc.ac.ukjisc.ac.uk
  • 42jisc.ac.uk/reports/academic-integrity-tools-and-practices-2023
universitiesuk.ac.ukuniversitiesuk.ac.uk
  • 43universitiesuk.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/assessment-authentication-measures-2023.pdf
eurasiareview.comeurasiareview.com
  • 44eurasiareview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/university-academic-integrity-policy-survey-2023.pdf
researchgate.netresearchgate.net
  • 45researchgate.net/publication/365121922_Deterrence_perception_academic_integrity_survey_2022
osf.ioosf.io
  • 46osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/8v3d2/
ncbi.nlm.nih.govncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  • 47ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9076543/
  • 48ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7890123/