Search
  Advanced Search
 
Chapter search
Book cover: Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research

Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research

ISSN: 1475-1488
Series editor(s): Donna Bobek Schmitt

Subject Area: Accounting and Finance

Content: Series Volumes | icon: RSS Current Volume RSS

Options: To add Favourites and Table of Contents Alerts please take a Emerald profile

Previous article.Icon: Print.Table of Contents.Next article.Icon: .

Document request:
MANAGEMENT FRAUD RISK FACTORS: AN EXAMINATION OF THE SELF-INSIGHT OF AND CONSENSUS AMONG FORENSIC EXPERTS


Document Information:
Title:MANAGEMENT FRAUD RISK FACTORS: AN EXAMINATION OF THE SELF-INSIGHT OF AND CONSENSUS AMONG FORENSIC EXPERTS
Author(s):Sally A Webber, Barbara Apostolou, John M Hassell
Volume:7 ISBN: 978-0-76231-117-0 eISBN: 978-1-84950-280-1
Citation:Sally A Webber, Barbara Apostolou, John M Hassell (2004), MANAGEMENT FRAUD RISK FACTORS: AN EXAMINATION OF THE SELF-INSIGHT OF AND CONSENSUS AMONG FORENSIC EXPERTS, in (ed.) 7 (Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research, Volume 7), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp.75-96
DOI:10.1016/S1475-1488(04)07004-8 (Permanent URL)
Publisher:Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article type:Chapter Item
Abstract:Over the past two years, fraudulent financial reporting has become a major concern of both the Securities and Exchange Commission and investors. These concerns have been spurred by evidence that several high-profile companies such as Enron, Tyco, WorldCom, and HealthSouth have published false and/or misleading financial reports. Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 82 specifies that auditors have a responsibility to assess the likelihood of management fraud and identifies specific risk factors that should be considered when making that assessment. Apostolou et al. (2001b) examined how internal and external auditors rate the relative importance of these factors. This study extends Apostolou et al. (2001b) by examining how forensic experts at four Big 5 professional service firms assess the factors specified in SAS No. 82. These assessments produced two different models of relative importance: (a) a statistical model (produced by the Analytic Hierarchy Process); and (b) a subjective model (based on subjects’ assessment of the relative weights). These models are then used to assess the self-insight of and the degree of agreement among the forensic experts. The results indicate that forensic experts have a moderately high degree of self-insight. A moderate to high degree of consensus among experts’ judgments about the relative importance of fraud risk factors was noted.

Fulltext Options:

Login

Login

Existing customers: login
to access this document

Login


- Forgot password?

- Athens/Institutional login

Purchase

Purchase

Downloadable; Printable; Owned
HTML, PDF (158kb)
Purchase

To purchase this item please login or register.

Login


- Forgot password?

Recommend to your librarian

Complete and print this form to request this document from your librarian


Marked list


Bookmark & share

Reprints & permissions