External auditors’ use and perceptions of fraud factors in assessing fraudulent financial reporting risk (FFRR): Implications for audit policy and practice

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Security Journal Pub Date : 2023-09-23 DOI:10.1057/s41284-023-00399-w
Rasha Kassem
{"title":"External auditors’ use and perceptions of fraud factors in assessing fraudulent financial reporting risk (FFRR): Implications for audit policy and practice","authors":"Rasha Kassem","doi":"10.1057/s41284-023-00399-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This study used semi-structured interviews with twenty-four external auditors to explore how they perceive and use fraud factors when assessing fraudulent financial reporting risk in external audits. The fraud factors include top management’s motive, integrity, opportunity, rationalisation, and capabilities. The participants work for Big four audit firms and have international auditing experience, specifically in the US, the UK, Egypt, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. The findings reveal that top management’s integrity and motives are, in theory, the most critical factors in fraud risk assessment. However, a self-selection bias pushes external auditors not to evaluate these essential factors because they are too complicated to assess, and not enough guidance is provided to them by standard setters or audit firms. In turn, external auditors concentrate mainly on evaluating the opportunities to commit fraud when assessing fraud risk. This may lead to non-optimal fraud risk assessment and, ultimately, non-optimal audit quality. The findings have implications for policy, practice, and future research, later discussed.","PeriodicalId":47023,"journal":{"name":"Security Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Security Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-023-00399-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This study used semi-structured interviews with twenty-four external auditors to explore how they perceive and use fraud factors when assessing fraudulent financial reporting risk in external audits. The fraud factors include top management’s motive, integrity, opportunity, rationalisation, and capabilities. The participants work for Big four audit firms and have international auditing experience, specifically in the US, the UK, Egypt, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. The findings reveal that top management’s integrity and motives are, in theory, the most critical factors in fraud risk assessment. However, a self-selection bias pushes external auditors not to evaluate these essential factors because they are too complicated to assess, and not enough guidance is provided to them by standard setters or audit firms. In turn, external auditors concentrate mainly on evaluating the opportunities to commit fraud when assessing fraud risk. This may lead to non-optimal fraud risk assessment and, ultimately, non-optimal audit quality. The findings have implications for policy, practice, and future research, later discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
外部审计师在评估欺诈性财务报告风险(FFRR)中对舞弊因素的使用和认知:对审计政策和实践的影响
摘要本研究采用半结构化访谈的方式对24名外部审计人员进行访谈,探讨他们在评估外部审计中的虚假财务报告风险时如何感知和使用欺诈因素。欺诈因素包括高层管理人员的动机、诚信、机会、合理化和能力。学员就职于四大审计事务所,具有国际审计经验,特别是在美国、英国、埃及、阿联酋、卡塔尔、巴林和沙特阿拉伯。研究结果表明,从理论上讲,高层管理人员的诚信和动机是欺诈风险评估中最关键的因素。然而,自我选择的偏见促使外部审计师不去评估这些基本因素,因为它们太复杂而无法评估,而且标准制定者或审计公司没有向他们提供足够的指导。反过来,外部审计人员在评估欺诈风险时主要集中于评估欺诈的机会。这可能导致非最佳的欺诈风险评估,并最终导致非最佳的审计质量。这些发现对政策、实践和未来的研究具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The?Security Journal?is a dynamic publication that keeps you informed about the latest developments and techniques in security management. Written in an accessible style it is the world's premier peer-reviewed journal for today's security researcher and professional. The journal is affiliated to ASIS International and has an advisory board which includes representatives from major associations expert practitioners and leading academics.The?Security Journal?publishes papers at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice focusing on the latest research findings on all aspects of security. Regular features include personal opinions and informed comment on key issues in security as well as incisive reviews of books videos and official reports.What are the benefits of subscribing?Learn from evaluations of the latest security measures policies and initiatives; keep up-to-date with new techniques for managing security as well as the latest findings and recommendations of independent research; understand new perspectives and how they inform the theory and practice of security management.What makes the journal distinct?Articles are jargon free and independently refereed; papers are at the cutting edge in developing ideas and improving practice; we have appointed an Advisory Board which includes representatives from leading associations skilled practitioners and the world's leading academics.How does the journal inform?The?Security Journal?publishes innovative papers highlighting the latest research findings on all aspects of security; incisive reviews of books videos and official reports; personal opinions and informed comment on key issues.Topics covered include:fraudevaluations of security measuresshop theftburglaryorganised crimecomputer and information securityrepeat victimisationviolence within the work placeprivate policinginsuranceregulation of the security industryCCTVtaggingaccess controlaviation securityhealth and safetyarmed robberydesigning out crimesecurity staffoffenders' viewsPlease note that the journal does not accept technical or mathematic submissions or research based on formulas or prototypes.
期刊最新文献
Open-source intelligence and great-power competition under mediatization Stakeholders’ views of online surveillance capabilities: a comparative analysis of the debates in UK, Finland and Norway A general problem-solving matrix (GPSM): combining crime prevention and public health tools The dimensions of ‘forensic biosecurity’ in genetic and facial contexts Identifying and preventing future forms of crimes using situational crime prevention
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1