Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to determine if there is a level of agreement among accounting academics, auditors, and forensic accountants that the current environmental framework created by regulatory and standard setting bodies appears to require a merger of common ground between forensic accounting and auditing. Design/methodology/approach -A survey in the USA is conducted for a random sample of accounting academics, forensic accounting practitioners, and auditors questioning if the addition of forensic accounting proficiency should be part of an auditor's skill set to increase the probability of detecting fraud. Findings -The results indicate that forensic accounting has a place in the audit process and that auditors may need to add some of these skills as the market for audits have changed.Research limitations/implications -The limitation of the current paper which is inherent to survey research is non-response bias. The only way to evaluate this is to test late responses and compare them to earlier results. There are no significant differences. Future research in this area should progress to experimental designs using foundational forensic procedures in a simulated audit setting to ascertain the success and the proper implementation of these skills in finding financial statement fraud. Practical implications -This paper will increase auditor awareness of the importance of the acquisition of foundational forensic accounting skills that will enhance the likelihood of fraud detection. Originality/value -Professions evolve by way of regulatory, political, and social responses. Although there are some distinct differences between forensic accountants and auditors in the USA, there is enough common ground to answer the call for auditors to be more mindful of finding fraud. This paper intends to draw attention to the fact that foundational forensic accounting skills may represent a paradigm shift for professional skills in the accounting markets.
Purpose
– The purposes of this paper are to highlight those topics of forensic accounting that have received little or no attention in the forensic accounting research that has been published in forensic accounting research journals; discover what research methods have been most commonly used; and identify research methods that have been infrequently used.
Design/methodology/approach
– This is a descriptive research study that explores the topics and methods used in forensic accounting research published in forensic accounting journals.
Findings
– Fraud and quantitative methods make up the largest percentage of topics and research methods published in forensic accounting journals.
Research limitations/implications
– Limited to forensic accounting journals. Results suggest forensic accounting researchers are using mimetic topics and methods of accounting research. The absence of diversity in forensic accounting research topics and methods has the potential to compromise the overall contribution of forensic accounting research.
Practical implications
– This paper identifies gaps in topics and research methods in forensic accounting research to encourage research in diverse topics using diverse methods that will be valuable to forensic accountants.
Originality/value
– This original research is the first to survey and classify research published in forensic accounting journals according to topic and method.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.