Effects of materiality, risk, and ethical perceptions on fraudulent reporting by financial executives
Journal of Business Ethics 38 (3):243 - 262 (2002)
This paper examines fraudulent financial reporting within the context of Jones' (1991) ethical decision making model. It was hypothesized that quantitative materiality would influence judgments of the ethical acceptability of fraud, and that both materiality and financial risk would affect the likelihood of committing fraud. The results, based on a study of CPAs employed as senior executives, provide partial support for the hypotheses. Contrary to expectations, quantitative materiality did not influence ethical judgments. ANCOVA results based on participants' estimates of the likelihood that a "typical CPA" would manipulate reported results indicated that both materiality and risk significantly influenced the likelihood of fraud, but that the perceived morality of the action did not. In contrast, results based on participants' self-reported behavior indicated that materiality and the perceived morality of the action would influence the likelihood of fraud, but that financial risk would not. Regardless of the measure used for the likelihood of fraud, the results indicate that financial executives continue to be influenced by quantitative materiality when misstatements are clearly material on qualitative grounds.
|Keywords||Philosophy Ethics Business Education Economic Growth Management|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
A Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996-2003. [REVIEW]Michael J. O'Fallon & Kenneth D. Butterfield - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 59 (4):375 - 413.
A Review of The Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996–2003. [REVIEW]Michael J. O’Fallon & Kenneth D. Butterfield - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 59 (4):375-413.
Corporate Fraud and Managers' Behavior: Evidence From the Press. [REVIEW]Jeffrey Cohen, Yuan Ding, Cédric Lesage & Hervé Stolowy - 2010 - Journal of Business Ethics 95 (2):271 - 315.
Ethical Judgments: What Do We Know, Where Do We Go? [REVIEW]Peter E. Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 115 (3):575-597.
Dilemmas, Conspiracies, and Sophie's Choice: Vignette Themes and Ethical Judgments.Peter E. Mudrack & E. Sharon Mason - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 118 (3):639-653.
Similar books and articles
Towards a Financial Fraud Ontology: A Legal Modelling Approach. [REVIEW]John Kingston, Burkhard Schafer & Wim Vandenberghe - 2004 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (4):419-446.
Impact of Post-Restatement Actions Taken by a Firm on Non-Professional Investors' Credibility Perceptions.Elizabeth Dreike Almer, Audrey A. Gramling & Steven E. Kaplan - 2008 - Journal of Business Ethics 80 (1):61 - 76.
Financial Accountants' Perceptions of Management's Ethical Standards.Jill M. D'Aquila - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 31 (3):233 - 244.
The Influence of Publication of Financial Statements, Risk of Takeover and Financial Position of the Auditee on Public Auditors' Unethical Behaviour.M. van Dijk - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 28 (4):297-305.
Qualitative Financial Statement Disclosures.William E. Shafer - 2004 - Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (3):433-451.
The Effects of Moral Reasoning and Self-Monitoring on CFO Intentions to Report Fraudulently on Financial Statements.Nancy Uddin & Peter R. Gillett - 2002 - Journal of Business Ethics 40 (1):15 - 32.
What's Wrong with the Treadway Commission Report? Experimental Analyses of the Effects of Personal Values and Codes of Conduct on Fraudulent Financial Reporting.Arthur P. Brief, Janet M. Dukerich, Paul R. Brown & Joan F. Brett - 1996 - Journal of Business Ethics 15 (2):183 - 198.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #357,474 of 2,177,827 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #317,251 of 2,177,827 )
How can I increase my downloads?