E d u cationa l
Webcam as a New Invigilation Method: Students’ Comfort and
Potential for Cheating
Noeman Mirza, BScN, RN; and Eric Staples, DNP, RN
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this descriptive
survey study was to determine the
comfort of nurse practitioner (NP)
students with webcam invigilation
of online examinations and the ef-
fectiveness of webcam invigilation in
preventing students from cheating.
An online questionnaire was devel-
oped for NP students currently en-
rolled in Ontario’s Primary Health
Care Nurse Practitioner program, in
which online examinations are invigi-
lated through a webcam. All students
were contacted via e-mail and invited
to participate in the online question-
naire. The response rate was 77%.
Data were collected and analyzed.
Results demonstrated that webcam
invigilation can be an uncomfort-
able experience and that cheating on
webcam-invigilated examinations is
possible. The results will contribute
to the scarce literature available on
webcam invigilation of online exami-
Received: June 17, 2008
Accepted: February 4, 2009
Posted: October 30, 2009
Mr. Mirza is Registered Nurse, Bridge-
point Health, Toronto, and Dr. Staples is
Coordinator, Ontario Primary Health Care
Nurse Practitioner Program, and Assistant
Professor, School of Nursing & Department
of Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sci-
ences, McMaster University, Hamilton, On-
tario, Canada.
Address correspondence to Eric Staples,
DNP, RN, Assistant Professor, School of
Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMas-
ter University, 1200 Main St. West, Hamilton,
Ontario, Canada L8N 3Z5; e-mail: staples@
mcmaster.ca.
doi:10.3928/01484834-20090916-06
116
inno v ations
nations, but research with a larger
sample is needed if results are to be
generalized to the webcam invigila-
tion process.
D
istance learning has become a
new trend on which many in-
stitutions and students of all
ages around the world rely. Distance
learning often uses networked multi-
media technologies, and it is increas-
ing in reputation due to the flexibil-
ity it provides learners. Even nursing
institutions globally now offer higher
education programs via the Internet;
some have an onsite campus class com-
ponent, whereas others are completely
online. Ontario’s Primary Health Care
Nurse Practitioner (PHCNP) program
combines both face-to-face and dis-
tance learning methods. In some areas
of Ontario, where geographic boundar-
ies are expansive between students,
a predominantly distance delivery
model has been formed. Students at-
tend campus three to four times per
semester to consolidate learning and
to write their final examinations,
whereas their midterm examinations
are completed online and are invigi-
lated via webcam.
Students are asked to purchase a
basic webcam with a 6403480 resolu-
tion or higher. The webcam is intend-
ed to be attached to the screen of the
computer or laptop so the student’s
face can be seen. A student can take
the examination from home. In a
webcam-invigilated online examina-
tion, the start and end times of the ex-
amination are determined by the in-
stitution and students are expected to
log into their off-site computers ahead
of time to complete preexamination
runs. The students are sent a practice
examination link, which allows them
to test their webcam 2 weeks prior to
the online examination. These prac-
tice runs are monitored and ensure
students are connected to the webcam
and the Adobe Flash® Media Server
that invigilates students through their
webcams. The online examination is
programmed in Adobe ColdFusion®
software, which runs on basic port 80,
making the examination as accessible
as an ordinary Web page. Therefore,
a student is not locked out from using
other programs.
All webcam images are displayed
and monitored on a large screen
through the designated distance edu-
cation headquarters at a central cam-
pus. Two or more invigilators monitor
how often students change pages and
how long they take to answer ques-
tions. The invigilators do not have a
nursing background, but they are ex-
perts in the field of Web-based exami-
nation processes.
To increase examination security
and to prevent copying and cheating,
the server scrambles the examina-
tion questions so that each student
attempts a different question at one
given time. This is done to prevent
students from logging onto chat sys-
tems to share answers with others.
Students are also not allowed to leave
the examination to go to the bath-
room, although exceptions are made
for students who are pregnant. If
cheating is suspected, the student is
disconnected from the examination
and can reschedule the examination
or present his or her case to the edu-
cational institution.
Copyright © SLACK Incorporated
 Educational Innovations

Although webcam-invigilated on-

line examinations in the PHCNP
program may seem to be a more con-
venient and flexible alternative to on-
site examinations, their effectiveness
in completely preventing cheating is
questionable. Given that no litera-
ture is available in which the effec-
tiveness of webcam-invigilated online
examinations is tested or proven, the
PHCNP program may be overesti-
mating the effectiveness of webcam
invigilation of online examinations.
Therefore, this study aims to contrib-
ute to the scarce literature available
on webcam invigilation of online ex-
aminations in general or specific to
PHCNP programs, and provide valu-
able information to educational insti-
tutions seeking an alternative meth-
od for invigilating distance learning
examinations.
Table 1
Questionnaire
Survey Question
1. Do you feel comfortable writing an online examination?
2. Do you feel you are provided with enough instructions to write an online
examination?
3. Does it make you uncomfortable to be continuously monitored by a webcam while
you write an online examination?
4. When do you feel most uncomfortable about being webcam invigilated?
5. How would you rate your comfort level with this type of invigilation process?
6. How likely is someone to cheat on a webcam-invigiliated (at-home) online
examination versus a university-based (onsite) online examination?
7. How effective is webcam invigilation in preventing cheating on online
examinations?
8. Do you think at-home (webcam-invigilated) online examinations can prevent
students from cheating just as much as university-based (onsite-invigilated) online
examinations?

(depending how modern a student’s (http://www.SurveyMonkey.com) and

Literature Review
Various search engines (e.g., Cu-
mulative Index to Nursing and Allied
Health Literature, Medline, Social Sci-
ences Index, and Education Resources
Information Center) were searched to
find literature on webcam invigilation
and proctoring, the use of webcams in
education, online examination invigi-
lation and proctoring, and online ex-
amination cheating. Information was
found on examination performance
and academic dishonesty, but results
related directly to webcam invigila-
tion of online examinations were lim-
ited and were only found on Google.
In the realm of education, webcams
have been suggested as useful alterna-
tive face-to-face communication meth-
ods that can be used for online tutor-
ing between teachers and students
(Houge, Peyton, Geier, & Petrie, 2007)
or for conversations and discussions
between postgraduate students and
their supervisors (Wisker, Robinson, &
Shacham, 2007).
Web assessors who use webcams
and actual proctors and invigilators
allow the software to recognize typ-
ing styles and speeds and whether a
student pauses between certain let-
ters. This system allows invigilators
to monitor up to 50 students at a time
by viewing and often listening to them
webcam is) through the webcam. This
allows the invigilators to stop the ex-
amination if they suspect cheating
(Rose, 2008). A recent technological
advancement of 360° webcam hard-
ware with a fingerprint recognizer
allows the webcam to view the whole
environment (from the walls to the
student to the computer screen and
beyond), and the fingerprint recog-
nizer ensures the correct person is
taking the online examination (Pope,
2007). There is also a built-in micro-
phone that picks up sounds from the
student’s room. This new device has
recently been introduced in the mar-
ket and is not currently being used by
Ontario’s PHCNP program. Instead,
Ontario’s PHCNP program is using
a similar system, by which multiple
students are visually monitored on a
large screen and their typing styles
and speeds are electronically exam-
ined.
Method
An online questionnaire was de-
veloped for distance PHCNP students
currently enrolled in the Ontario
PHCNP program, in which midterm
online examinations are invigilated
through a webcam. The question-
naire was posted on SurveyMonkey
a link was created to provide poten-
tial participants with access to the
online questionnaire. All students
(N = 43) were contacted via e-mail in-
vitation and encouraged to access the
questionnaire through the link and
participate in the study. The ques-
tionnaire consisted of eight questions
(Table 1).
The introduction to the survey
provided study participants with
confirmation that the survey was
anonymous, as they were not asked
to provide any information that could
identify them. Following the initial
e-mail to PHCNP students involved in
writing webcam-invigilated online ex-
aminations, the link was available for
access. Three weeks after the initial
e-mail, a reminder e-mail was sent
to all potential participants regard-
ing the study. After another 3 weeks
passed, the link was made inacces-
sible. Data were collected by Survey-
Monkey throughout the 6-week pe-
riod while the link was accessible to
the study participants. Demographic
data were not measured because they
were not relevant to the study.
Results
The response rate to the question-
naire was 77% (N = 33). The collected

Journal of Nursing Education • Vol. 49, No. 2, 2010 117

Educational Innovations
Table 2
Students’ Comfort and Perceptions of Cheating on
Webcam-Invigilated Online Examinations
Comfort and Cheating
Student comfort with webcam invigilation
Comfortable
Uncomfortable
Cheating on webcam-invigilated examination
Likely to cheat
Neither likely nor unlikely
Unlikely to cheat
Prevention of cheating with webcam invigilation
Prevents cheating
Does not prevent cheating
data were retrieved from Survey-
Monkey and analyzed to determine
whether any patterns existed in the
responses. Responses to the ques-
tionnaire indicated that more than
80% of the study participants felt
comfortable writing an online exami-
nation and said they were provided
with enough instructions. More than
70% of the participants stated they
felt uncomfortable being continu-
ously monitored by a webcam while
writing their online examination
(Table 2).
Because the questionnaire had an
open-ended component related to a
participant’s comfort level, responses
showed that some participants felt
comfortable, some felt uncomfortable,
and some had mixed feelings when
being invigilated via webcam. When
asked to rate their comfort level dur-
ing an online webcam invigilated ex-
amination, approximately 60% of the
participants indicated they felt com-
fortable throughout the examination,
whereas others indicated otherwise.
Finally, when participants were asked
to rate how comfortable they felt with
webcam invigilation, 46% indicated
very comfortable, 33% indicated com-
fortable, and the remaining 21% were
uneasy about the webcam invigilation
process.
In terms of cheating, 21% of par-
ticipants felt that someone is quite
likely to cheat on a webcam-invigi-
118
Total (N = 33)
9 this case was webcam invigilation.
24
7 either a positive or a negative effect
8 on students’ performance—a small
18
19
14
lated at-home online examination
versus a university-based onsite on-
line examination. This was followed
by 24% that were unsure and 55%
that felt someone is unlikely to cheat
(Table 2). When asked whether they
thought webcam invigilation of on-
line examinations is effective in pre-
venting cheating, 55% of the study
participants thought this process of
invigilation is somewhat effective to
very effective in preventing someone
from cheating, whereas the rest of
the study participants did not agree.
The results also showed that more
than 40% of the participants thought
webcam invigilation is less effective
than onsite invigilation in prevent-
ing cheating on online examinations
(Table 2).
Because the questionnaire also
had an open-ended component relat-
ed to cheating on webcam-invigilated
examinations, responses were similar
and primarily showed there is always
a possibility of cheating on any type
of examination, including one invigi-
lated via webcam.
Discussion
The results indicated two major
themes: participants’ psychologi-
cal comfort with continuous webcam
invigilation, and the possibility of
cheating on webcam-invigilated on-
line examinations.
Psychological Comfort
An area of concern in the study
was that more than 80% of students
felt uncomfortable being invigilated
via webcam. A person’s discomfort
can be seen as a type of cognitive
anxiety toward a stimulus, which in
Studies on the effects of cognitive
anxiety on performance show that an
increase in cognitive anxiety can have
increase in cognitive anxiety can in-
crease performance, whereas a high
increase can drop performance level
drastically (Hardy, Jones, & Gould,
1996; Humara, 1999). A similar cor-
relation between psychological com-
fort and performance levels is further
supported by Humara (1999) and by
Wiggins and Brustad (1996). To see
how many study participants could
have had a possible decreased perfor-
mance due to their decreased comfort,
data revealed that more than 20% felt
either uncomfortable throughout or
periodically during the examination.
This is comparable to more than 20%
of participants who indicated they did
not feel comfortable with the overall
webcam invigilation process. Some
study participants described their
discomfort as such:
• I am always afraid of doing
something wrong.
• I feel that even though I am
not cheating…they may suspect
that I am because I often look up or
look down when I am thinking.
• Feeling of being watched.
These responses are a clear in-
dication of continuous or recurrent
feelings of discomfort, fear, nervous-
ness, and apprehension, which hint
at a state of anxiousness. Therefore,
if experiencing these phases of in-
creased anxiety leads to reduced per-
formance rates, then it is evident that
the webcam invigilation process may
be jeopardizing the examination per-
formance of at least 20% of the study
participants.
Cheating and Webcam Invigilation
Because it is a universal occur-
rence, the possibility of cheating
can be questioned on every type of
Copyright © SLACK Incorporated

university examination, including
one that is invigilated via webcam
(Mwamwenda & Monyooe, 2000).
Cheating on examinations has become
an attractive research topic around the
world (Rocha, da Silva, Nascimento,
de Siqueira, & Otta, 2007). In the cur-
rent study, most participants agreed
that webcam invigilation is somewhat
effective in preventing cheating, but
they thought that one in two students
is still likely to cheat on a webcam-in-
vigilated online examination.
This trend is also noticed when ap-
proximately half of the participants
indicated thinking that webcam in-
vigilation is less effective than on-
site invigilation in preventing cheat-
ing on online examinations. If one
in two study participants think that
cheating can occur, it may mean that
one in two students may attempt or
has already attempted to cheat on a
webcam-invigilated online examina-
tion. In this study, the possibility of
cheating was also highlighted by the
responses of study participants:
• They could make some kind
of cheat sheets and post them
somewhere…[they are] not visible to
the [webcam] or have someone in the
room with them.
• Since a webcam can’t see ev-
erything, if one wants to, one can be
inventive and place material in plac-
es that can’t be seen by webcam.
• It would be easier to cheat
with webcam. There are so many
places to place notes that cannot be
seen by the webcam (front of shirt,
keyboard tray, thighs of pants).…
Personally I was more comfortable
with an invigilator.
The above responses undoubtedly
point to increased cheating possibili-
ties during webcam-invigilated ex-
aminations, compared with onsite in-
vigilators. Although students consider
cheating to be a wrongful act, they
are known to engage in the behavior
Journal of Nursing Education • Vol. 49, No. 2, 2010
(Anderman, Greisinger, & Westerfield,
1998). Although many strategies could
be implemented to promote a climate
of academic integrity (Scanlan, 2006),
the act of cheating in nursing educa-
tion must be taken seriously by fac-
ulty as it affects the student’s future
nursing practice (Bradshaw & Lowen-
stein, 1990; Hoyer, Booth, Spelman, &
Richardson, 1991). It is crucial for
nursing faculty to promote academic
integrity through role modeling, de-
veloping and implementing policies,
and allowing students to develop their
moral character (Gaberson, 1997).
Conclusion
Webcam invigilation of online ex-
aminations is a new research topic.
The results of this study attempt to
not only contribute to the scarce liter-
ature available on this research topic,
but also provide valuable information
to educational institutions seeking
an alternative examination method
for the student population enrolled
in their distance learning programs.
Although this study focuses on the
comfort of students and possibilities
of cheating, other perspectives of
webcam invigilation could also be ex-
plored in future research. These areas
of research may include a more thor-
ough assessment of the webcam invig-
ilation process; its role in preventing
students from cheating; its effective-
ness compared with an actual human
invigilator; and its possible role in fu-
ture invigilation. A larger number of
participants will also add to the reli-
ability of future study results. Faculty
must also look into alternative ways
of assessment that are more suitable
to online testing and may minimize
the risk of cheating.
References
Anderman, E.M., Greisinger, T., & Wester-
field, G. (1998). Motivation and cheat-
Educational Innovations
ing during early adolescence. Journal
of Educational Psychology, 90, 84-93.
Bradshaw, M.J., & Lowenstein, A.J. (1990).
Perspectives on academic dishonesty.
Nurse Educator, 15(5), 10-15.
Gaberson, K.B. (1997). Academic dishon-
esty among nursing students. Nursing
Forum, 32(3), 14-20.
Hardy, L., Jones, G., & Gould, D. (1996).
Understanding psychological prepa-
ration for sport: Theory and practice
of elite performers. Chichester, UK:
Wiley.
Houge, T.T., Peyton, D., Geier, C., & Pet-
rie, B. (2007). Adolescent literacy tu-
toring: Face-to-face and via webcam
technology. Reading Psychology, 28,
283-300.
Hoyer, P.J., Booth, D., Spelman, M.R., &
Richardson, C.E. (1991). Clinical cheat-
ing and moral development. Nursing
Outlook, 39, 170-173.
Humara, M. (1999). The relationship be-
tween anxiety and performance: A cog-
nitive-behavioral perspective. Athletic
Insight: The Online Journal of Sport
Psychology, 1(2).
Mwamwenda, T.S., & Monyooe, L.A.
(2000). Cheating among University of
Transkei students. Psychological Re-
ports, 87, 148-150.
Pope, J. (2007, June 19). Universities
employ webcams to proctor online ex-
ams. USA Today. Retrieved December
3, 2008, from http://www.usatoday.
com/tech/news/2007-06-19-webcams-
exams_N.htm
Rocha, M.M., da Silva, G.A., Nascimen-
to, L., de Siqueira, J.O., & Otta, E.
(2007). Cheating on college exami-
nations. Psychological Reports, 100,
379-386.
Rose, C. (2008). Virtual proctoring in dis-
tance education: An open-source solu-
tion. Eighth Annual IBER & TLC Con-
ference Proceedings 2008, 1-7.
Scanlan, C.L. (2006). Strategies to pro-
mote a climate of academic integrity
and minimize student cheating and
plagiarism. Journal of Allied Health,
35, 179-185.
Wiggins, M.S., & Brustad, R.J. (1996).
Perception of anxiety and expectations
of performance. Perceptual and Motor
Skills, 83(3, Pt. 1), 1071-1074.
Wisker, G., Robinson, G., & Shacham, M.
(2007). Postgraduate research success:
Communities of practice involving co-
horts, guardian supervisors and online
communities. Innovations in Educa-
tion and Teaching International, 44,
301-320.
119
Copyright of Journal of Nursing Education is the property of SLACK Incorporated and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.