Misleading the Auditor with Fractional Truths

Mary P. Durkin, S. J. Jollineau, Sarah C Lyon
{"title":"Misleading the Auditor with Fractional Truths","authors":"Mary P. Durkin, S. J. Jollineau, Sarah C Lyon","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4729283","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This descriptive study examines the nature and rationalization of deception by client management when communicating with the external auditor. We placed experienced financial reporting professionals in the role of a CFO responding to an auditor inquiry. Participants chose one of four responses: the complete truth, clear mistruth, or one of two “fractional truths” (i.e., a response that is technically true but omits or is vague about relevant information). More than half of the participants chose a deceptive response, with the most common type of deceptive response chosen being a fractional truth. Many participants rationalized their deceptive responses as strictly responding to the question asked and not speculating about the unknown. Most participants who responded deceptively preferred email for communication, whereas those who responded truthfully preferred in-person communication. We discuss the implications of client deception for audit firms and offer suggestions for future research.\n Data Availability: Data are available from the authors upon request.\n JEL Classifications: M4.","PeriodicalId":507782,"journal":{"name":"SSRN Electronic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SSRN Electronic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4729283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This descriptive study examines the nature and rationalization of deception by client management when communicating with the external auditor. We placed experienced financial reporting professionals in the role of a CFO responding to an auditor inquiry. Participants chose one of four responses: the complete truth, clear mistruth, or one of two “fractional truths” (i.e., a response that is technically true but omits or is vague about relevant information). More than half of the participants chose a deceptive response, with the most common type of deceptive response chosen being a fractional truth. Many participants rationalized their deceptive responses as strictly responding to the question asked and not speculating about the unknown. Most participants who responded deceptively preferred email for communication, whereas those who responded truthfully preferred in-person communication. We discuss the implications of client deception for audit firms and offer suggestions for future research. Data Availability: Data are available from the authors upon request. JEL Classifications: M4.
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
用零碎事实误导审计员
这项描述性研究探讨了客户管理层在与外部审计师沟通时进行欺骗的性质和合理性。我们让经验丰富的财务报告专业人士扮演首席财务官的角色,回答审计师的询问。参与者从四种回答中选择一种:完全真实、明显失实或两种 "部分真实"(即回答在技术上真实,但遗漏或模糊了相关信息)中的一种。半数以上的参与者选择了欺骗性回答,其中最常见的欺骗性回答是 "部分真实"。许多参与者将他们的欺骗性回答合理化为严格地回答了所提出的问题,而不是对未知的猜测。大多数做出欺骗性回答的参与者更喜欢用电子邮件进行交流,而做出真实回答的参与者则更喜欢当面交流。我们讨论了客户欺骗对审计公司的影响,并对未来研究提出了建议。数据提供:数据可向作者索取。JEL 分类:M4.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Multilingualism and International Mental Health Research – The Barriers for Non-native Speakers of English The Oxford Olympics Study 2024: Are Cost and Cost Overrun at the Games Coming Down? The Frontiers of Nullification and Anticommandeering: Federalism and Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation Wasserstein gradient flow for optimal probability measure decomposition Using Legitimacy Strategies to Secure Organisational Survival Over Time: The Case of EFRAG
×
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