تأثیر ترکیب اعضای گروه طوفان فکری بر ارزیابی ریسک تقلب: نقش گروه اقلیت

نویسندگان
کاظم شمس الدینی 1
محبوبه جعفری 2
1 دانشیار،گروه حسابداری، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران (نویسنده مسئول).
2 استادیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده مدیریت و اقتصاد، دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان، کرمان، ایران. jafari.m@uk.ac.ir
چکیده
با توجه به رسوایی‌ های گزارشگری مالی در سال‌ های اخیر، برگزاری جلسات طوفان فکری میان اعضای گروه حسابرسی و بهبود اثربخشی جلسات طوفان فکری در حسابرسی مورد توجه قرار گرفته است. از این رو، پژوهش حاضر با اتکا بر تئوری تبدیل و نفوذ اقلیت، اثر ترکیب اعضای گروه طوفان فکری تقلب بر عملکرد گروه طوفان فکری تقلب و قضاوت‌ های اعضای گروه پس از جلسه طوفان فکری تقلب بررسی کرده است. داده‌ ها با استفاده از ابزار پرسشنامه با مشارکت 93 نفر از دانشجویان مقطع تحصیلات تکمیلی دانشگاه شهید باهنر کرمان در سال 1403 از طریق نمونه‌ گیری در دسترس جمع‌ آوری شدند. تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ ها با استفاده از آزمون t مستقل و آزمون تحلیل واریانس یک راهه مستقل انجام شد. نتایج نشان می‌دهد، گروه‌ های اقلیت با افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ ای بالا، ریسک تقلب را نسبت به گروه‌ های کنترل (بدون افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ ای بالا)، بیشتر ارزیابی می‌کنند. همچنین ارزیابی نهایی فردی ریسک تقلب افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ ای پایین که در گروه‌‌ های اقلیت با افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ ای بالا طوفان فکری کرده‌ اند، بیشتر از ارزیابی نهایی فردی ریسک تقلب افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ ای پایین که در گروه‌های کنترل و اکثریت با افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ای بالا طوفان فکری کرده‌اند، است. به‌عبارت دیگر، ارزیابی نهایی فردی ریسک تقلب افراد دارای تردید حرفه‌ای پایین عضو گروه‌های اقلیت پس از جلسه طوفان فکری تقلب افزایش یافت. تفسیر این نتایج بر پایه تئوری تبدیل حاکی از آن است که حضور فعال یک اقلیت متشکل از افراد با تردید حرفه‌ای بالا، می‌تواند از طریق مکانیسم‌های نفوذ اجتماعی باعث تعدیل قضاوت‌های اعضای دارای تردید حرفه‌ای پایین شود. این پژوهش نقش کلیدی تنوع در ترکیب گروهی و قدرت اقلیت‌های فکری را در ارتقای کیفیت طوفان فکری حسابرسی تأیید می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
تردید حرفه‌ای
طوفان فکری تقلب
تئوری تبدیل

عنوان مقاله English

Fraud Brainstorming Group Composition in Auditing: The Persuasive Power of a Skeptical Minority

نویسندگان English

Kazem Shamsadini 1
Mahboobe Jafari 2
1 Accounting Department, Faculty of Management and Economics, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran. (Corresponding Auther).
2 Accounting Department, Faculty of Management and Economics, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran. jafari.m@uk.ac.ir
چکیده English

This paper experimentally examine the effect of the composition of fraud brainstorming group on fraud brainstorming performance and the judgments of the group after the fraud brainstorming. The statistical population of this research includes 93 graduate accounting and auditing students at Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman in 2024. To investigate hypotheses, independent-sample t-test and one-way analysis of variance test were used. Results indicate that groups with a minority of high trait skeptics assess fraud risk more than control groups with no high trait skeptics. Also, results indicate low trait skeptics who brainstorm in groups with a minority of high trait skeptics tend to view the minority high trait skeptic as the best member of the group because of that member’s unique insights. Their individual, post-brainstorming fraud risk assessments remain high, indicating conversion to the minority (skeptical) viewpoint. This paper highlights the importance of group composition. It suggests that firms can promote skeptical team judgments by leveraging individuals’ high trait skepticism in thoughtfully composed interacting groups.


کلیدواژه‌ها English

Conversion theory
Fraud brainstorming
professional skepticism
Afram, A. L. M. A. 2022. The effect of using brainstorming to improve the professional skepticism of the external auditor to discover fraud in the financial statements: A study of the opinions of a sample of external auditors in Iraq. Tikrit Journal of Administration and Economics Sciences, 18(60): 1-25.
Apandi, N. N., H. Rossieta, F. Fitriany, and L.S. Wondabio. 2024. Does Brainstorming in Supervision Audit Fieldwork Can Improve Professional Auditor Judgement?. Journal Pendidikan Akuntansi & Keuangan, 12(2): 225-236.
Bazerman, M. H., and D. Chugh. 2006. Bounded ethicality: The perils of loss framing. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior (pp. 399–422). American Psychological Association.
Bhattacharjee, S., T. King, and K. Walker. 2025. Harnessing humility: The Effects of Partner humility and Surface-Level Diversity on Auditors' Fraud Brainstorming Outcomes. Available at SSRN 5124663.
Brazel, J. F., T.D. Carpenter, and J.G. Jenkins. 2010. Auditors’ use of brainstorming in the consideration of fraud: Reports from the field. The Accounting Review, 85 (4): 1273–1301.
Carpenter, T. D. 2007. Audit team brainstorming, fraud risk identification, and fraud risk assessment: Implications of SAS No. 99. The Accounting Review, 82 (5): 1119–1140.
Chen, C. X., K.T. Trotman, and F. H. Zhou. 2015. Nominal versus interacting electronic fraud brainstorming in hierarchical audit teams. The Accounting Review, 90 (1): 175–198.
Dennis, S. A., and K. M. Johnstone. 2018. A natural field experiment examining the joint role of audit partner leadership and subordinates’ knowledge in fraud brainstorming. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 66: 14–28.
Dewi, Y., H. Suharman, P.S. Koeswayo, and N.D. Tanzil. 2023. What is the key determinant of the credit card fraud risk assessment in Indonesia? An idea for brainstorm. Bank and Bank System, 18(1): 26-37.
Elizabeth, A.P., and J.R. Robert. 2005. Fraud risk assessments and auditors’professional skepticism. Managerial Auditing Journal, 20(3): 321-330.
Glover, S. M., and D.F. Prawitt. 2014. Practitioner summary: Enhancing auditor professional skepticism: The professional skepticism continuum. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(2): 1–10.
Hammersley, J. S., E.M. Bamber, and T.D. Carpenter. 2010. The influence of documentation specificity and priming on auditors’ fraud risk assessments and evidence evaluation decisions. The Accounting Review, 85 (2): 547–571.
Harding, N., and K.T. Trotman. 2017. The effect of partner communications of fraud likelihood and skeptical orientation on auditors’ professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36 (2): 111–131.
Hurtt, R. K. 2010. Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1): 149–171.
Hurtt, R.K., H. Brown-Liburd, C.E. Earley, and G. Krishnamoorthy. 2013. Research on auditor professional skepticism: literature synthesis and opportunities for future research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 32(1): 45-97.
International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). 2012. Overall objectives of the independt auditor and the conduct of an audit in accordance with international standards on auditing. New York, NY: IFAC.
International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR). 2015. International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators: Report on 2015 Survey of Inspection Findings. Available at: https://www.ifiar.org/activities/annual-inspection-findings-survey.
Janssen, S., K. Hardies, A. Vanstraelen, and K.M. Zehms. 2020. Professional skepticism traits and fraud brainstorming quality. Available at SSRN 3719155.
Kim, S., and K.T. Trotman. 2015. The comparative effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing professional skepticism. Accounting and Finance, 55(4): 1015–1040.
Knechel, W. R., C. Staden, and L. Sun. 2013. Auditing and organizational behavior: The impact of experience on decision-making. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(3), 91–114.
Kramer, A., D.P. Bhave, and T.D. Johnson. 2014. Personality and group performance: The importance of personality composition and work tasks. Personality and Individual Differences, 58: 132–137.
Lase, H., A. Pradipta, and M. Siahaan. 2024. Exploring the role of brainstorming in enhancing audit quality. Journal of Management, Accounting, General Finance and International Economic Issues, 3(4): 931-944.
Martin, R., and M. Hewstone. 2008. Majority versus minority influence, message processing and attitude change: The source-contextelaboration-model. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 40: 237–326.
Martin, R., M. Hewstone, and P.Y. Martin. 2003. Resistance to persuasive messages as a function of majority and minority source status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39 (6): 585–593.
Martin, R., P.Y. Martin, J.R. Smith, and M. Hewstone. 2007. Majority versus minority influence and prediction of behavioral intentions and behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43 (5): 763–771.
McAllister, M., A.D. Baly, and K. Kadous. 2018. Fraud brainstorming group composition in auditing: The persuasive power of a skeptical minority. The Accounting Review, 96 (3): 431–448.
McLeod, P. L., R.S. Baron, M.W. Marti, and K. Yoon. 1997. The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer mediated group discussion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (5): 706–718.
Mohammed, S., and L.C. Angell. 2003. Personality heterogeneity in teams: Which differences make a difference for team performance? Small Group Research 34 (6): 651–677.
Moscovici, S. 1980. Toward a theory of conversion behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 13: 209–239.
Nelson, M.W. 2009. A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 28(2): 1-34.
Nemeth, C. J. 1986. Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93 (1): 23–32.
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2012. Maintaining and applying professional skepticism in audits. Staff Audit Practice Alert No. 10.
Quadackers, L., T. Groot, and A. Wright. 2014. Auditors' professional skepticism: Neutrality versus presumptive doubt. Contemporary Accounting Research, 31(3): 639–657.
Sagara, Y., and P. P. Alkotdriyah. 2020. Interpersonal Skill-based Audit Team Brainstorming: Solution for Fraud Detection. Jurnal Reviu Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 10(3): 458-474.
Saiewitz, A., M. K. Dodgson, and M. M. Doxey. 2021. Examining the impact of audit firms’ use of skepticism feedback in auditor training. Available at SSRN 3183471.
Schein, E. H. 2010. Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Tang, J., and K. E. Karim. 2019. Financial fraud detection and big data analytics–implications on auditors’ use of fraud brainstorming session. Managerial Auditing Journal, 34(3): 324-337.
Trotman, K. T., T. D. Bauer, and K. A. Humphreys. 2015. Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 47: 56–72.
Woolley, A. W., C. F. Chabris, A. Pentland, N. Hashmi, and T. W. Malone. 2010. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science.
حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری
دوره 10، شماره 20
بهار 1404
صفحه 345-383