The differences between auditors and forensic accountants with respect to their ability to identify effective additional procedures to mitigate identified fraud risks
Abstract
Any decision an auditor takes concerning fraud is perceived as extremely sensitive. Several enormous financial scandals at the beginning of the 21st century created doubt about the role of the auditors for these companies being questioned. Auditors were being blamed for having made mistakes with respect to fraud risks. It seems that in general auditors experience degrees of difficulties with respect to fraud risk assessment. The aim of this article is to introduce my research. It is a literature study outlining my research approach to the aforementioned problem of fraud risk assessment and the role auditors have in this. Because it is a preliminary study this article does not contain any empirical data. Over the course of the last few years there have been a substantial number of articles appearing in leading international accounting journals investigating the causes as to why auditors have difficulties with respect to fraud risk assessment. Former research indicates that forensic accountants might be better equipped than auditors to identify effective procedures to mitigate fraud risks. With my research I want to investigate why this is the case. Therefore I am identifying factors which influence the quality of the fraud risk assessment. By means of a combination of an experiment and a survey I want to investigate the (causal) relationships between these factors and an effective fraud risk assessment.Download Info
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.Bibliographic Info
Paper provided by Nyenrode Business Universiteit in its series Nyenrode Research Papers Series with number NRI09-23.Length:
Date of creation: 2009
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dgr:nijrep:2009-23
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.library.nyenrode.nl
Related research
Keywords: Audit planning; Forensic auditing; Fraud risk assessments; Fraud risk factors;This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ACC-2010-02-20 (Accounting & Auditing)
- NEP-ALL-2010-02-20 (All new papers)
References
No references listed on IDEASYou can help add them by filling out this form.
Citations
Lists
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dgr:nijrep:2009-23For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ronald Piebes).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.