2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1099-1123.2009.00398.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Integrated Fraud Risk Factors and Robust Methodology: A Review and Comment

Abstract: This paper introduces a range of literature from a broad area of social sciences. It identifies a need to gain a better understanding of the causation of fraud and the complexity of fraud risk factors. Its suggestions are under consideration by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) for possible inclusion in the year 2009 material. Later descriptive and robust fraud risk models, such as those proposed by Krambia-Kapardis and Steane & Cockerell, have still not fully explained the aetiology of fra… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 70 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Tuanakotta (2010), the pressure or incentive perceived by the perpetrator of fraud viewed as a non-shareable financial need or non-shareable problems. According to Kapardis & Krambia-Kapardis, (2016); Milyutina, (2013); Sitorus & Scott, (2009), pressure usually arises from a critical need or greed in a person who commits fraud. Sometimes it is more related to psychological satisfaction, which proves that one can beat the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Tuanakotta (2010), the pressure or incentive perceived by the perpetrator of fraud viewed as a non-shareable financial need or non-shareable problems. According to Kapardis & Krambia-Kapardis, (2016); Milyutina, (2013); Sitorus & Scott, (2009), pressure usually arises from a critical need or greed in a person who commits fraud. Sometimes it is more related to psychological satisfaction, which proves that one can beat the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The opportunity was therefore created by collusion between a number of parties, and it is hard to point to any particular group as the sole perpetrator responsible for the fraud. Sitorus and Scott (2009) recently suggested that collusion is an important risk factor, and the Danish asset-stripping case supports this view. The parties colluding in stripping companies formed a wide network with relations to the top of the legal system.…”
Section: Jfc 181mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…1 (DISAPA 1993) emphasised that Downloaded by [Cukurova Universitesi] at 01:55 02 November 2014 intentional errors and mistakes might remain undetected even when an audit was planned and conducted in accordance with 'good audit practice'. Evidently, the standards of this period did not establish proactive responsibilities for the detection and prevention of fraud, unlike post-1996 standards (Sitorus and Scott 2009;Holm, Langsted, and Seehausen 2012). While the promulgations added a regulatory layer to the interpretation of 'good audit practice' as interpreted by the professional body, the latter could still be challenged in the judicial system when determining the auditor's responsibilities in relation to specific fraud cases.…”
Section: The Role Of the Professional Bodiesmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Over the years, various researchers have discussed the extent and nature of the auditor's responsibilities in relation to fraud (Chandler, Edwards, and Anderson 1993;Dezoort and Lee 1998;Sitorus and Scott 2009). For the audit profession it has been a challenge to maintain public trust Downloaded by [Cukurova Universitesi] at 01:55 02 November 2014 when facing fraud scandals (Satava, Caldwell, and Richards 2006;Cowton 2009).…”
Section: Prior Research and Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%