Auditing Section Research Summaries Space

A Database of Auditing Research - Building Bridges with Practice

This is a public Custom Hive  public

Posts

  • Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips
    Selecting Audit Samples Using Benford's Law.
    research summary posted September 14, 2015 by Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips, tagged 06.0 Risk and Risk Management, Including Fraud Risk, 06.02 Fraud Risk Models 
    Title:
    Selecting Audit Samples Using Benford's Law.
    Practical Implications:


    The authors contribute to digital analysis by formulating two alternative mathematical programming models that can assist auditors in selecting audit samples, using Benford’s law. The models consider multiple conformity tests and test statistics simultaneously, taking into account the interdependencies between the conformity tests, and allow the auditor either to identify a subset of nonconforming records in a dataset or to define a specific number of records to audit. This approach is new in the literature.

    Citation:

    da Silva, C. G., and P. R. Carreira. 2013. Selecting Audit Samples Using Benford's Law. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 32 (2): 53-65.

  • Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips
    The construction of the risky individual and vigilant...
    research summary posted November 17, 2014 by Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips, tagged 06.0 Risk and Risk Management, Including Fraud Risk, 06.01 Fraud Risk Assessment, 06.02 Fraud Risk Models 
    Title:
    The construction of the risky individual and vigilant organization: A genealogy of the fraud triangle
    Practical Implications:

    What appears as a technical and neutral device, that is to say the fraud triangle, actually promotes a vision of fraud anchored in both the individual and the organization, while downplaying the social, political and cultural explanations of fraud. At the end of the day, we are confronted with a series of representations, which lie at the heart of the professional work of a range of actors in the economy, that lead us to view fraud through the lens of individual transgressions being perpetrated while leaving the systemic and socio-political aspects of fraud unchallenged. Would fraud prevention gain in effectiveness if these neglected aspects were dealt with more explicitly? The paper provides reflexivity to practitioners that might help them understand and question the normative and moralizing assumptions that underlie the devices they use.

    For more information on this study, please contact Jérémy Morales.

    Citation:

    Morales, J., Gendron, Y. and H. Guénin-Paracini. 2014. The construction of the risky individual and vigilant organization: A genealogy of the fraud triangle. Accounting, Organizations and Society 39 (3): 170-194

  • Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips
    The Strategic Effects of Auditing Standard No. 5 in a...
    research summary posted June 15, 2016 by Jennifer M Mueller-Phillips, tagged 01.0 Standard Setting, 01.03 Impact of New Accounting Pronouncements, 06.0 Risk and Risk Management, Including Fraud Risk, 06.02 Fraud Risk Models 
    Title:
    The Strategic Effects of Auditing Standard No. 5 in a Multi-Location Setting
    Practical Implications:

     This paper examines how the auditor’s evaluation of internal control impacts substantive testing in a two-location setting with correlated internal control strengths. When control strengths are independent, internal control strength pairings have no effect on the manager’s probability choice to commit fraud or on the auditor’s substantive test effort. This study shows how the manager’s opportunity to commit fraud and informational characteristics of internal control tests impact the manager’s probability choice of fraud and the auditor’s choice of substantive test effort.

    Citation:

    Patterson, E.R. and J.R. Smith. 2016. The Strategic Effects of Auditing Standard No. 5 in a Multi-Location Setting. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 35 (1): 119-138. 

Filter by Type

Filter by Tag