IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v37y2012i4p242-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitude, Machiavellianism and the rationalization of misreporting

Author

Listed:
  • Murphy, Pamela R.

Abstract

Audit standards around the world describe three factors, known together as the fraud triangle, that purportedly predict the likelihood of fraudulent financial reporting (IAASB, 2009; PCAOB, 2005). The first two factors, opportunity and incentive/pressure, are largely accepted as being associated with fraud (Erickson, Hanlon, & Maydew, 2004; Graham, Harvey, & Rajgopal, 2005; Wells, 2001), whereas the third factor, attitude/rationalization, remains a relative mystery (Hogan, Rezaee, Riley, & Velury, 2008; Wells, 2004). I conducted an experiment in which participants were provided the opportunity and motivation to misreport, in order to explore attitude and rationalization in greater detail. As expected, I found that participants whose attitude favors misreporting and individuals who are higher in Machiavellianism are both more likely to misreport; and participants who misreport experience negative emotions (affect). Of concern, however, is that higher Machiavellians who misreport feel significantly less guilt than others who misreport. When I changed the experimental setting and asked participants to think about common rationalizations they may use, in an attempt to reduce rationalizing before they made their reporting decision, significantly fewer participants misreported; while those who still misreported rationalized to an even greater extent. Implications for future research and fraud detection and prevention are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Murphy, Pamela R., 2012. "Attitude, Machiavellianism and the rationalization of misreporting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 242-259.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:37:y:2012:i:4:p:242-259
    DOI: 10.1016/j.aos.2012.04.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361368212000414
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.aos.2012.04.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peecher, ME, 1996. "The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1), pages 125-140.
    2. Zeelenberg, M., 1999. "Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioral decision-making," Other publications TiSEM 38371d1b-31fd-45b0-860f-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Pamela Murphy & M. Dacin, 2011. "Psychological Pathways to Fraud: Understanding and Preventing Fraud in Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 101(4), pages 601-618, July.
    4. Kim, Chung K. & Evans III, John H. & Moser, Donald V., 2005. "Economic and equity effects on tax reporting decisions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(7-8), pages 609-625.
    5. Graham, John R. & Harvey, Campbell R. & Rajgopal, Shiva, 2005. "The economic implications of corporate financial reporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1-3), pages 3-73, December.
    6. Uri Gneezy, 2005. "Deception: The Role of Consequences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 384-394, March.
    7. Gunnthorsdottir, Anna & McCabe, Kevin & Smith, Vernon, 2002. "Using the Machiavellianism instrument to predict trustworthiness in a bargaining game," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 49-66, February.
    8. Dillard, Amanda J. & Fagerlin, Angela & Cin, Sonya Dal & Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J. & Ubel, Peter A., 2010. "Narratives that address affective forecasting errors reduce perceived barriers to colorectal cancer screening," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 45-52, July.
    9. Blanthorne, Cindy & Kaplan, Steven, 2008. "An egocentric model of the relations among the opportunity to underreport, social norms, ethical beliefs, and underreporting behavior," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 684-703.
    10. Swieringa, Rj & Weick, Ke, 1982. "An Assessment Of Laboratory Experiments In Accounting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20, pages 56-101.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Diana Falsetta & Jennifer K. Schafer & George T. Tsakumis, 2024. "How Government Spending Impacts Tax Compliance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 513-530, March.
    2. Eddy Cardinaels & Yuping Jia, 2016. "How Audits Moderate the Effects of Incentives and Peer Behavior on Misreporting," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 183-204, May.
    3. Jonathan Farrar & Tisha King, 2023. "To Punish or Not to Punish? The Impact of Tax Fraud Punishment on Observers’ Tax Compliance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(1), pages 289-311, February.
    4. Ostermaier, Andreas, 2016. "Reciprocity and honesty in capital budgeting: Positive spill-over effects of reporting," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145904, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Rode, Julian, 2007. "Truth and Trust in Communication: An Experimental Study of Behavior under Asymmetric Information," Ratio Working Papers 111, The Ratio Institute.
    6. Paul Coram & James R. Frederickson & Matthew Pinnuck, 2024. "Earnings management: Who do managers consider and what is the relative importance of ethics?," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 49(2), pages 214-248, May.
    7. Xin Cheng & Dan Palmon & Yinan Yang & Cheng Yin, 2023. "Strategic Earnings Announcement Timing and Fraud Detection," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(3), pages 851-874, January.
    8. Douthit, Jeremy & Majerczyk, Michael, 2019. "Subordinate perceptions of the superior and agency costs: Theory and evidence," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    9. Mayorga, Diane & Trotman, Ken T., 2016. "The effects of a reasonable investor perspective and firm's prior disclosure policy on managers' disclosure judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 50-62.
    10. Mark Brosnan & Keith Duncan & Tim Hasso & Janice Hollindale, 2023. "Non‐GAAP earnings and executive compensation: An experiment," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4375-4398, December.
    11. Kiridaran Kanagaretnam & Jimmy Lee & Chee Yeow Lim & Gerald Lobo, 2018. "Societal trust and corporate tax avoidance," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 1588-1628, December.
    12. Jonathan Farrar & Steven E. Kaplan & Linda Thorne, 2019. "The Effect of Interactional Fairness and Detection on Taxpayers’ Compliance Intentions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 167-180, January.
    13. Luminita Enache & Hila Fogel‐Yaari & Heather Li, 2022. "Signalling long‐term focus through textual emphasis on innovation: are firms putting their money where their mouth is?," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3791-3836, September.
    14. Ozlem Arikan, 2018. "Financial estimates against investors’ preferences: anchoring, denial and spillover effects," Accounting and Business Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 299-320, April.
    15. Dennis, Sean A. & Johnstone, Karla M., 2018. "A natural field experiment examining the joint role of audit partner leadership and subordinates’ knowledge in fraud brainstorming," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 14-28.
    16. Ben-Ner, Avner & Putterman, Louis & Ren, Ting, 2011. "Lavish returns on cheap talk: Two-way communication in trust games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-13, February.
    17. Jiandong Chen & Douglas Cumming & Wenxuan Hou & Edward Lee, 2016. "Does the External Monitoring Effect of Financial Analysts Deter Corporate Fraud in China?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 727-742, April.
    18. Shalvi, Shaul & Reijseger, Gaby & Handgraaf, Michel J.J. & Appelt, Kirstin C. & ten Velden, Femke S. & Giacomantonio, Mauro & De Dreu, Carsten K.W., 2013. "Pay to walk away: Prevention buyers prefer to avoid negotiation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 40-49.
    19. Gintis, Herbert, 2016. "Homo Ludens: Social rationality and political behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 126(PB), pages 95-109.
    20. Janne O. Y. Chung & Sylvia H. Hsu, 2017. "The Effect of Cognitive Moral Development on Honesty in Managerial Reporting," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 563-575, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:37:y:2012:i:4:p:242-259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.