IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v21y2004i3p719-745.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decomposition of Fraud†Risk Assessments and Auditors' Sensitivity to Fraud Cues

Author

Listed:
  • T. JEFFREY WILKS
  • MARK F. ZIMBELMAN

Abstract

Practitioners and regulators are concerned that when auditors perceive management's attitude or character as indicative of low fraud risk, they are not sufficiently sensitive to high levels of incentive or opportunity risks in their overall fraud†risk assessments. In this study, we examine whether a fraud†triangle decomposition of fraud†risk assessments (that is, separately assessing attitude, opportunity, and incentive risks prior to assessing overall fraud risk) increases auditors' sensitivity to opportunity and incentive cues when perceptions of management's attitude suggest low fraud risk. In an experiment with 52 practicing audit managers, we find that auditors who decompose fraud†risk assessments are more sensitive to opportunity and incentive cues when making their overall assessments than auditors who simply make an overall fraud†risk assessment. However, this increased sensitivity to opportunity and incentive cues appears to happen only when those cues suggest low fraud risk. When opportunity and incentive cues suggest high fraud risk, auditors are equally sensitive to those cues whether they use a decomposition or a holistic approach. We discuss and examine potential explanations for this finding.

Suggested Citation

  • T. Jeffrey Wilks & Mark F. Zimbelman, 2004. "Decomposition of Fraud†Risk Assessments and Auditors' Sensitivity to Fraud Cues," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3), pages 719-745, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:3:p:719-745
    DOI: 10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Monica Ramos Montesdeoca & Agustín J. Sánchez Medina & Felix Blázquez Santana, 2019. "Research Topics in Accounting Fraud in the 21st Century: A State of the Art," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-31, March.
    2. Desai, Naman, 2015. "The Effects of Group Brainstorming on the Auditor’s Search for Potential Misstatements and Assessment of Fraud Risk in the Presence of Pressures and Opportunities," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-11, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    3. Abdul Ghafoor & Rozaimah Zainudin & Nurul Shahnaz Mahdzan, 2019. "Factors Eliciting Corporate Fraud in Emerging Markets: Case of Firms Subject to Enforcement Actions in Malaysia," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 587-608, December.
    4. Mark E. Lokanan & Prerna Sharma, 2023. "Two Decades of Accounting Fraud Research: The Missing Meso-Level Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, September.
    5. Geoffrey Bartlett & Eric Johnson & Philip Reckers, 2014. "Accountability and Role Effects in Balanced Scorecard Performance Evaluations When Strategy Timeline Is Specified," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 143-165, May.
    6. Bujaki, Merridee & Lento, Camillo & Sayed, Naqi, 2019. "Utilizing professional accounting concepts to understand and respond to academic dishonesty in accounting programs," Journal of Accounting Education, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 28-47.
    7. Sanaz Aghazadeh & Yoon Ju Kang & Marietta Peytcheva, 2023. "Auditors’ scepticism in response to audit committee oversight behaviour," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(2), pages 2013-2034, June.
    8. Kris Boudt & Hong Anh Luu, 2022. "Estimation and decomposition of food price inflation risk," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(2), pages 295-319, June.
    9. Cohen, Jeffrey & Ding, Yuan & Lesage, Cedric & Stolowy, Hervé, 2008. "The role of managers’ behavior in corporate fraud," HEC Research Papers Series 900, HEC Paris.
    10. Ken T. Trotman & Roger Simnett & Amna Khalifa, 2009. "Impact of the Type of Audit Team Discussions on Auditors' Generation of Material Frauds," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(4), pages 1115-1142, December.
    11. Shabnam Fazli Aghghaleh & Zakiah Muhammaddun Mohamed, 2014. "Fraud Risk Factors of Fraud Triangle and the Likelihood of Fraud Occurrence: Evidence from Malaysia," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 6(1), pages 1-7.
    12. Ziwei Wang & Chunfeng Wang & Zhenming Fang, 2023. "Common institutional ownership and corporate misconduct," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(1), pages 102-136, January.
    13. Konstantinos Vasilakopoulos & Christos Tzovas & Apostolos Ballas, 2021. "Banks’ Risk and The Impact of Audit Quality on Income Smoothing," Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, Faculty of Accounting and Management Information Systems, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 20(3), pages 425-453, September.
    14. Downen, Tom & Kim, Sarah & Lee, Lorraine, 2024. "Algorithm aversion, emotions, and investor reaction: Does disclosing the use of AI influence investment decisions?," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    15. Arzhenovskiy S.V. & Bakhteev A.V. & Sinyavskaya T.G. & Hahonova N.N., 2019. "Audit Risk Assessment Model," International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), International Journal of Economics & Business Administration (IJEBA), vol. 0(Special 1), pages 74-85.
    16. Jie Hao & Viet Pham & Meng Guo, 2022. "The Gender Effects of Audit Partners on Audit Outcomes: Evidence of Rule 3211 Adoption," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 177(2), pages 275-304, May.
    17. Hideaki Sakawa & Naoki Watanabel, 2022. "Accounting Frauds and Main-Bank Monitoring in Japanese Corporations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(2), pages 605-621, October.
    18. Dan Ioan Topor, 2017. "The Auditor's Responsibility for Finding Errors and Fraud from Financial Situations: Case Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 7(1), pages 342-352, January.
    19. Herron, Eddward T. & Cornell, Robert M., 2021. "Creativity amidst standardization: Is creativity related to auditors’ recognition of and responses to fraud risk cues?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 314-326.
    20. Ashari Ashari & Marthin Nanere & Philip Trebilcock, 2018. "Corruption awareness and ethical decision making in Indonesia," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center, vol. 14(3), pages 570-586, June.
    21. Desai, Naman & Gupta, Vishal, 2015. "Selective Perceptions and Group Brainstorming: An Investigation of Auditors’ Fraud Risk Assessment," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-03-14, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    22. Desai, Naman & Jain, Shailendra Pratap & Jain, Shalini & Tripathy, Arindam, 2020. "The impact of implicit theories of personality malleability on opportunistic financial reporting," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 258-265.
    23. Rajat Deb, 2018. "Financial Audit or Forensic Audit? Government Sector Panorama," Indian Journal of Corporate Governance, , vol. 11(2), pages 135-158, December.

    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:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:3:p:719-745. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.