2017
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2951396
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Solving the Puzzle: Helping Auditors Find Fraud in Evidence Evaluation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 97 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some categorization rules include, similarity, status differentials, age, personality, hierarchical level within an organization, technical accounting knowledge, managerial skills, business experience, and alumni status (Wilson and Kayatani 1968;Billig and Tajfel 1973;Dion 1973;Brewer 1979;Finkelstein, Burke, and Raju 1995;Menon and Williams 2004;Lennox 2005;Gino, Ayal, and Ariely 2009;Pickerd et al 2015;Austin and Carpenter 2017). As such, it is possible, and likely, that staff auditors are part of many different in-groups because of different means of classification.…”
Section: In-group Bias Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some categorization rules include, similarity, status differentials, age, personality, hierarchical level within an organization, technical accounting knowledge, managerial skills, business experience, and alumni status (Wilson and Kayatani 1968;Billig and Tajfel 1973;Dion 1973;Brewer 1979;Finkelstein, Burke, and Raju 1995;Menon and Williams 2004;Lennox 2005;Gino, Ayal, and Ariely 2009;Pickerd et al 2015;Austin and Carpenter 2017). As such, it is possible, and likely, that staff auditors are part of many different in-groups because of different means of classification.…”
Section: In-group Bias Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%