This study aimed to address the gap in the literature through a comprehensive comparison of different types of violations of academic integrity (VAI), cheating, plagiarism, fabrication and facilitation (Pavela in J College Univ Law 24(1):1–22, 1997), conducted in analog versus digital settings, as well as students’ and faculty members’ perceptions regarding their severity. The study explored differences in perceptions regarding students’ VAI and penalties for VAI among 1482 students and 42 faculty members. Furthermore, we explored the impact of socio-demographic characteristics (ethnic majority vs. minority students), gender, and academic degree on the perceived severity of VAI. Presented with a battery of scenarios, participants assessed the severity of penalties imposed by a university disciplinary committee. Furthermore, participants selected the penalties they deemed appropriate for violations engaged in by students, including: reprimanding, financial, academic, and accessibility penalties. All participants tended to suggest more severe penalties for VAI conducted in traditional analog environments than for the same offenses in digital settings. Students perceived all four types of penalties imposed by the disciplinary committee to be significantly more severe than faculty members. Moreover, findings demonstrated a significant difference between faculty and students in both perceptions of the severity of VAI and in relation to suggested punishments. Consistent with the Self-Concept Maintenance Model (Mazar et al. in J Mark Res 45(6):633–644, 2008) and Neutralizing Effect (Brimble, in: Bretag (ed) Handbook of academic integrity, SpringerNature, Singapore, pp 365–382, 2016), ethnic minority students estimated cheating, plagiarism, and facilitation violations as more severe than majority students. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

本研究旨在通过全面比较不同类型的违反学术诚信 (VAI)、作弊、抄袭、捏造和便利的行为来解决文献中的空白（Pavela in J College Univ Law 24(1):1-22, 1997 )，在模拟与数字环境中进行，以及学生和教职员工对其严重程度的看法。该研究探讨了 1482 名学生和 42 名教职员工对学生的 VAI 和对 VAI 处罚的看法的差异。此外，我们探讨了社会人口特征（少数族裔学生与少数族裔学生）、性别和学历对 VAI 严重程度的影响。参与者展示了一系列情景，评估了大学纪律委员会施加的处罚的严重程度。此外，参与者选择了他们认为适合学生违规行为的处罚，包括：谴责、经济、学术和无障碍处罚。所有参与者都倾向于建议对在传统模拟环境中进行的 VAI 进行比对数字环境中的相同犯罪更严厉的处罚。学生认为纪律委员会施加的所有四种处罚都比教职员工严重得多。此外，研究结果表明，教师和学生在对 VAI 严重性的看法和建议的惩罚方面存在显着差异。符合自我概念维护模型（Mazar 等人，J Mark Res 45(6):633–644, 2008）和中和效应（Brimble，in：Bretag (ed) Handbook of Academic Integrity，SpringerNature，新加坡，pp 365–382, 2016)，少数族裔学生估计作弊、剽窃和促进违规行为比多数学生更严重。讨论了研究结果的理论和实践意义。