197) has substantially helped in reducing cheating behaviors. The reason for this is what they call “neutralizing attitudes.” Justifying dishonesty as somehow necessary fosters acceptance of what students know is simply bad behavior. When institutions and teachers emphasize community and responsibility, neutralization becomes difficult (ibid, p. 198). “With respect to academic dishonesty, teachers who make moral appeals to students not to cheat may raise students' awareness of the dissonance between students' moral beliefs about cheating and their cheating behavior” (ibid, p, 199). Believing that teachers are indifferent to the value of integrity leads to student indifference. Fear of a negative consequence can, however, be an effective method of counteracting dishonesty, but it requires the student to believe that the threat is valid and that the consequence is real, not just theoretical. Students may, however, choose to cheat in an atmosphere that neither condones nor sanctifies academic dishonesty. Bernardi, Barzhoff, Martime, and Savasta (2012) found that it would take a semester to change cheating behaviors (p. 260). While some people will always try to find a way that they perceive as easier than simply working hard, students are less likely to attempt dishonest behavior if they believe that such dishonesty is morally wrong, they will get caught, and there will be punishment.