Has anyone ever heard of getting an investigation notice regarding a similarity analysis and “unusual similarities” between test answer sheets? Is this common?作者: NakedPuts 时间: 2013-4-28 12:52
Search on here. Basically they think you might have copied from the person sitting next to you.作者: Colum 时间: 2013-4-28 12:52
Ok, and what if you didn’t? I can’t seem to find a relevant thread as most exam related PCP incidents seem to be involving proctor’s writing up candidates for looking at other papers, or written past the time limit… this is absolute non-sense.作者: bkballa 时间: 2013-4-28 12:53
Try this
http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=%22PCP+investigatio...作者: marsilni 时间: 2013-4-28 12:53
So you got a letter from CFAI?作者: Carson 时间: 2013-4-28 12:53
mpr4437 Wrote:
——————————————————-
Ok, and what if you didn’t? I can’t seem to find a
relevant thread as most exam related PCP incidents
seem to be involving proctor’s writing up
candidates for looking at other papers, or written
past the time limit… this is absolute non-sense.
This is based on statistical analysis. They know who was sitting around you and they have tools to flag any very low probability events/ patterns. The CFAI is very advanced when it comes to this there are papers published explaining the models if you are interested check out Google Scholar ( google: Detecting cheating in multiple choice tests)
If you’re involved in one of those, don’t even think about fighting it, the math is irrefutable.作者: wizofoz 时间: 2013-4-28 12:53
Well, it would suck if the guy was copying off of you, creating the unusual similarities, even if you were eyes down all the time.作者: Carson 时间: 2013-4-28 12:54
^Yeah, if two answer sheets are similar, it doesn’t prove who cheated. Moreover, it might happen just by chance.作者: luda002 时间: 2013-4-28 12:54
Chance, not really. But yeah if other person copied not sure what they would do next.作者: maxmeomeo 时间: 2013-4-28 12:54
I don’t know how CFAI defines “similar”. If two answer sheets of neighbouring candidates are almost identical, it is of course because one of them cheated.作者: jarobi04 时间: 2013-4-28 12:54
Dude_CFA Wrote:
——————————————————-
Chance, not really. But yeah if other person
copied not sure what they would do next.
I believe they suspend both for a year. This is not the US justice system, there is no innocent until proven guilty.作者: Kapie 时间: 2013-4-28 12:55
cityboy Wrote:
——————————————————-
I don’t know how CFAI defines “similar”.
That’s why they have statistics.作者: cyber21 时间: 2013-4-28 12:55
higgmond Wrote:
——————————————————-
Search on here. Basically they think you might
have copied from the person sitting next to you.
I have a similar case. I also received a mail saying that my answers are similar to another person. The person sat next to me passed without getting an investigation, how we knew eachother was because we exchanged phone numbers after the test was done. In the mail the CFA institute said to me that my answers are similar to another person in the testing center, not specifying who. So shouldn’t the investigation be on two people? Could it be that the person sitting behind me have copied my answers?作者: chandsingh 时间: 2013-4-28 12:55
Billgates Wrote:
——————————————————-
higgmond Wrote:
————————————————–
—–
Search on here. Basically they think you might
have copied from the person sitting next to
you.
I have a similar case. I also received a mail
saying that my answers are similar to another
person. The person sat next to me passed without
getting an investigation, how we knew eachother
was because we exchanged phone numbers after the
test was done. In the mail the CFA institute said
to me that my answers are similar to another
person in the testing center, not specifying who.
So shouldn’t the investigation be on two people?
Could it be that the person sitting behind me have
copied my answers?
I suppose your answers could have been similar to the guy infront of you, the guy behind you, or the guy on the other side of you (assuming there was only a few feet gap between tables). There should be two investigations though.作者: OmarAdnan 时间: 2013-4-28 12:55
Yep, correlation is not causation. It would be supreme doufussness if they assumed that whoever got the higher score was the innocent party. (I’m not assuming that the other guy scored higher than you, but how else would one make a decision to investigate one side without investigating the other?).作者: dvilayphet 时间: 2013-4-28 12:56
Billgates Wrote:
——————————————————-
higgmond Wrote:
————————————————–
—–
Search on here. Basically they think you might
have copied from the person sitting next to
you.
I have a similar case. I also received a mail
saying that my answers are similar to another
person. The person sat next to me passed without
getting an investigation, how we knew eachother
was because we exchanged phone numbers after the
test was done. In the mail the CFA institute said
to me that my answers are similar to another
person in the testing center, not specifying who.
So shouldn’t the investigation be on two people?
Could it be that the person sitting behind me have
copied my answers?
TY for the answer, In the letter to the CFA (damn it, it’s against the rules to use “CFA” as a noun, but whatever”), I asked them TO please check the video recordings during the testing sessions, assuming they had it, and asked them to give me the test again for a retake so I can prove I did the answers all by myself, but they haven’t replied yet, so I have two questions:
1. If after 30 days when the investigation closes, they somehow found a very strong correlation in the answers, which serves as a circumstantial evidence, to “prove” one of the person of the similar answers cheated, but they don’t know who
So, my question is that, is the CFA institute more likely to drop the case or find both parties guilty? And what are the initial penalties? (before I can appeal)
Higg said that both parties would receive a year of suspension, which in my case, it would be very unfair and I have no ways of proving myself innocent or the other guy cheated off of my test, and I know that the CFA institute does not use the U.S. justice system in which any suspects would be innocent until proving guilty, in fact, it’s the opposite way around, so if I can not prove myself innocent, therefore, I must go down with the cheater?
1. But, what are the likely penalties? permanently barred? LoL?
2. And are they going to let me retake the exam to show them that I can get almost exactly the same answers as the first time I took it?作者: bulosehi 时间: 2013-4-28 12:56
Billgates,
Regarding your first point - the notion of circumstantial evidence doesn’t really come into play here. Since this is a civil matter, the burden of proof the CFAI legally has to meet is not reasonable doubt, rather it is on a balance of probabilities. In order for the CFAI to sanction you and not be subject to legal recourse (i.e. a lawsuit), they must be reasonably satisfied that the similarities between the two answer sheets is more likely (ie: 50%) to be the result of cheating than not.
That said, this argument applies to both parties involved. There should be two investigations going on.
I can’t speak to the possible penalties. Good luck.作者: Londonrocks 时间: 2013-4-28 12:56
It’s very tough. The situation is like the prosecutor and jury are on the same side. I think they do have an “independent panel” that is supposed to remove any bias, but again they have no upside to fighting for you vigorously.
In these cases, I can imagine the innocent being taken as guilty.
Obviously, they won’t let you retake it and match your scores, so forget about that working out.
I doubt you would get a permanent ban. check out the punishments they listed on their site. For “cheating during test” people tend to go for a few years of suspension usually作者: bulosehi 时间: 2013-4-28 12:56
I wonder what level of significance their statistics are set for? There’s something like 100,000 candidates these days, or is it 200,000.
A 5% alpha level would imply that 2500 - 5000 people might be false positives (assuming a single tail). A 1% alpha level would imply 500-1000 people might be false positives.
It’s fine to use statistics for screening for possible cheating, but there’s got to be other types of evidence before one can summarily suspend people.
I understand that this is a private organization and so CFAI can more or less do what they want, applying whatever standards they feel, but surely it can’t be good to say… Please take our test, and by the way, we’re going to throw about 2.5% of you out each year and accuse you of statistically cheating.作者: d2rockstar 时间: 2013-4-28 12:57
bchadwick Wrote:
——————————————————-
I wonder what level of significance their
statistics are set for? There’s something like
100,000 candidates these days, or is it 200,000.
A 5% alpha level would imply that 2500 - 5000
people might be false positives (assuming a single
tail). A 1% alpha level would imply 500-1000
people might be false positives.
It’s fine to use statistics for screening for
possible cheating, but there’s got to be other
types of evidence before one can summarily suspend
people.
I understand that this is a private organization
and so CFAI can more or less do what they want,
applying whatever standards they feel, but surely
it can’t be good to say… Please take our test,
and by the way, we’re going to throw about 2.5% of
you out each year and accuse you of statistically
cheating.
There wouldn’t be near the many false positives after taking proximity into account. Similar results on a test taken in Dallas and one in Chicago wouldn’t factor in.作者: stalkey 时间: 2013-4-28 12:57
No, but the alpha level would presumably be set for likelihood of similarity, conditional on proximity, yes?
And maybe it’s just set really really high, like 5 standard deviations.作者: pacmandefense 时间: 2013-4-28 12:57
anyone knows what were the actions last year or previous years for such “unusual similarity” .. or has anyone received anything from CFAI apart from the acknowledgement mail???作者: ASSet_MANagemen 时间: 2013-4-28 12:57
in my case on the similarity issue,
i proposed to
1. check the video and audio recordings
2. give me the same test so i can get the same answers
3. lie detector test, take me to a lie detector test center or some sort and conduct a thorough investigation.
and to the responses, some of you guys said that the CFAI is not going to give me a test to retake to let me prove that I did all the questions by myself,
1. why’s that?作者: dirk01 时间: 2013-4-28 12:58
Maybe because you can remember all your answers?
They are definitely not going to let you retake it and you can forget about the lie detector. You will find out sooner or later than the CFAI is not necessarily concerned with a handful of people who are wrongly punished. Not when 100,000 people are taking a test each year. There’s bound to be some false positives in there somewhere. The problem is that there is usually no way to prove that you didn’t cheat.
I truly wish anyone that gets these letters the best of luck but you should prepare for the worst.作者: mkytz15 时间: 2013-4-28 12:58
well, the CFAI will most likely give me a response on the 22nd since that’s when the 30 days of investigation will close, not sure if it’s going to take longer, but I will keep you guys updated on my case.
and to hezagenius, referring to the above posts, quote ”
I truly wish anyone that gets these letters the best of luck but you should prepare for the worst.
”
thank you, and I’m prepared to get permanently banned. Well, on the bright side, I can still go to HBS or Warton for a master or take the FRM, etc…作者: sabaruch 时间: 2013-4-28 12:58
@billgates How do you know it is only a 30 day investigation. I have a similar problem and they are not giving me any kind of timeframe for resolution. Did you get a response?作者: JustasS 时间: 2013-4-28 12:58
Same case, and I didn’t have the impression of been cheated by any other candidate, just the lottery of loser.作者: farrukhsadiq 时间: 2013-4-28 12:59
Billgates Wrote:
——————————————————-
some of you guys said that
the CFAI is not going to give me a test to retake
to let me prove that I did all the questions by
myself,
1. why’s that?
No joke man, but if you have to ask why and can’t figure it out for yourself, you don’t have a future in finance.
Also remember: this is not innocent until proven guilty court of law here. This is the prosecutor and judge together.作者: evolsteevol 时间: 2013-4-28 12:59
No, I haven’t heard from them yet and its been 40 days.
Does anyone know the penalties for having similar answers with somebody else before you can appeal?作者: Ionutzakis 时间: 2013-4-28 12:59
Hello ,
Guys , I have the same problem , i am a candidate for CFA Level I in June 2011 , They send me the sam letter of “Unusual Similarity” Till now I haven’t got any response , does any one got a response so far ?
Thanks
AxiomMan
