Fraud diamond, Machiavellianism and fraud intention

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to test the causality of fraud diamond factors (pressure, rationalization, opportunity and capability) and Machiavellian personality on fraud intention. Design/methodology/approach This study used a 2 × 2 × 2 × 2 web-based laboratory experiment. Our subjects are accounting students from various Indonesian universities as surrogates of an accountant of a firm. We analyzed the data using the independent t-test. Findings This study provides empirical evidence that the four aspects of fraud diamond, namely pressure, opportunity, rationalization and capability cause fraud intention. Besides, high Machiavellian attitude also causes high fraud intention. Research limitations/implications This study is a Web-based one that is subject to the instability of internet access. Specifically, some subjects had to redo the completion of their experimental modules because of the unstable internet connection. Practical implications The results of this study suggest organizations to pay attention to their members’ behavioral aspects that can be the symptoms of fraud and to design whistleblowing systems to prevent fraud intention as an opportunity factor within organizations. Social implications Social implications are to develop the appropriate whistleblowing system to mitigate the fraud. Originality/value The novelty of this study lies in combining the experimental test of fraud diamond (internal and external factors) and Machiavellianism as a personality factor as the determinants of fraud intention. Further, another novelty lies in the use of the antifraud system as a proxy of opportunity that has not yet extensively investigated by previous studies.

Academic Fraud in Online System during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Lampung - Indonesia

“…Students who exhibit academic fraud behavior continue to seek rationalization by saying that academic fraud is justified for a variety of reasons [3]. Fraud (cheating) can provide pressure to cheat -if other students are found to be cheating, then to ensure that they are not harmed, highly ethical students may feel pressured to cheat [12]. Students who always commit academic fraud or cheat repeatedly have the most important reason, namely imitating.…”

“…Also, a high Machiavellian attitude can lead to high fraudulent intentions. Then, White [12] which conducts a reflection on academic integrity and accounting assessment during COVID19 and online learning states that students face incentives and pressures to engage in errors, opportunities that arise from online learning and assessment, and hold complex perceptions around their attitudes to academic integrity and rationalization of misperceptions. Bicer [13] states that for imitating students, a strong reason in the rationalization of cheating and the pressure do not affect academic cheating.…”

Fraud Risk Assessment: Experimental Study on the Alternative Fraud Model and Auditor Risk Preferences

“…Abayomi, & Sorunke (2016); Anisykurlillah (2016); Utami, Noviyanti, Wijono, & Mohamed (2019), have provided empirical findings with the same variable which show that all factors in the Diamond Theory have an influence on the intention to commit fraud. Rengganis, Sari, Budiasih, Wirajaya, & Suprasto (2019), described that the diamond theory in reporting of financial statements which pressure has a positive impact on fraud on financial statement, opportunity has a negative impact on fraud of financial statement, and rationality and capacity do not have an effect on fraud of financial statements.…”

Reorentasi Audit Internal Untuk Melawan Korupsi Pengadaan

“…Politisi dan rekanan swasta secara berjamaah merasionalisasi penipuan di organisasi pemerintahan untuk keuntungan mereka sendiri (Utami, Wijono, Noviyanti, & Mohamed, 2019). Di balik kolusi berjamaah tersebut, kegiatan pengadaan barang dan jasa salah satu titik curam modus operandi political corruption yang terencana dan terintegrasi secara berjamaah di antara para penyelenggara pemerintah dan pihak rekanan.…”

“…Fakta di atas disebabkan adanya kuasa penyalahgunaan wewenang (politic corruption) mulai dari tahap penganggaran sampai pertanggungjawaban yang langsung disubordinasi oleh pimpinan (kepala daerah) (Brucker & Rebele 2010;Morales, Gendron, & Guénin-Paracini, 2014). Hal ini termasuk pendapat dari Utami, Wijono, Noviyanti, & Mohamed (2019) yang mengatakan bahwa kuasa head of goverment official atas wewenang itu tidak lain untuk melakukan dan merasionalisasi tindakan fraud dalam pengelolaan keuangan (daerah). Fraud atau kecurangan itu disebabkan adanya penyimpangan-penyimpangan (fraud) terselubung oleh pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan.…”