Abstract The digitalization of higher education has heightened the urgency for universities to address and penalize instances of plagiarism effectively. Previous studies have often relied on surveys to assess students’ attitudes towards plagiarism. However, questionnaires may suffer from social desirability bias and need to oversimplify the complex, context-dependent nature of plagiarism. This study employs a vignette study approach to examine how 2,043 students at a Swiss university assess and sanction hypothetical plagiarism scenarios. We use multilevel regression models and find that personal morality, punitive attitudes, the use of electronic resources, and age are associated with more severe assessments of plagiarism. In contrast, negative peer influence, lack of self-control, and prior engagement in plagiarism negatively affect students’ assessments of the seriousness of plagiarism cases. We find that moral and punitive attitudes, the frequent use of electronic resources, and being male is associated with preferring harsher penalties. Comparisons with academic staff responses (N = 766) indicate that although staff take a slightly stricter stance on severity assessments and sanction choices, their overall evaluation pattern remains similar. By examining the factors that shape students’ and staff’s assessments of hypothetical plagiarism cases and their choices of sanctions, our study aims to help universities develop effective antiplagiarism policies that will be perceived as fair and proportionate by both students and academic staff.

Abstract ICH-GCP guidelines have provided international ethical, scientific, quality standards for designing, conducting, recording, and reporting of clinical trials, and are hugely popular in the region. Recent revisions to its guidance; ICH-GCP; E6 (R3) have brought significant changes in both structure and content from its predecessor, affecting every aspect of trial conduct, oversight, and planning through reporting. The latest version of ICH-GCP E6 (R3) is ensuring the rights, safety welfare and the well-being of human rights subjects. It aims to adapt and stay relevant in the ever-evolving world of clinical trials, embracing diverse types and settings, and keeping pace with technological and methodological advances. There are many themes and structural changes in E6 (R3). In this article, we provide a detailed account of how the human subject system-based research ethics architecture (HS-SBREA) at Weil Cornell Medicine-Qatar (WCM-Q) addresses the many themes and structural changes in E6 (R3). Particularly the requirement to foster a culture of ethical conduct & build quality management systems to provide protection to human participants in clinical research. We believe that this can be achieved through a primacy of ethical principle-based approach. The focus on primacy of principles has long been established at WCM-Q as a goal for promoting the universal applicability of the four bioethical principles. This has been important in addressing the unique challenges posed by ethical relativism, which is an inevitable outcome of a diverse, rich heterogenous population in Qatar and within the professional biomedical workforce at WCM-Q. We address some of the themes in this discourse to contextualize our responses as a research institution and medical college.