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.