IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v21y2004i3p719-745.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decomposition of Fraud†Risk Assessments and Auditors' Sensitivity to Fraud Cues

Author

Listed:
  • T. JEFFREY WILKS
  • MARK F. ZIMBELMAN

Abstract

Practitioners and regulators are concerned that when auditors perceive management's attitude or character as indicative of low fraud risk, they are not sufficiently sensitive to high levels of incentive or opportunity risks in their overall fraud†risk assessments. In this study, we examine whether a fraud†triangle decomposition of fraud†risk assessments (that is, separately assessing attitude, opportunity, and incentive risks prior to assessing overall fraud risk) increases auditors' sensitivity to opportunity and incentive cues when perceptions of management's attitude suggest low fraud risk. In an experiment with 52 practicing audit managers, we find that auditors who decompose fraud†risk assessments are more sensitive to opportunity and incentive cues when making their overall assessments than auditors who simply make an overall fraud†risk assessment. However, this increased sensitivity to opportunity and incentive cues appears to happen only when those cues suggest low fraud risk. When opportunity and incentive cues suggest high fraud risk, auditors are equally sensitive to those cues whether they use a decomposition or a holistic approach. We discuss and examine potential explanations for this finding.

Suggested Citation

  • T. Jeffrey Wilks & Mark F. Zimbelman, 2004. "Decomposition of Fraud†Risk Assessments and Auditors' Sensitivity to Fraud Cues," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3), pages 719-745, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:3:p:719-745
    DOI: 10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1506/HGXP-4DBH-59D1-3FHJ?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:21:y:2004:i:3:p:719-745. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.