Internal auditors' fraud judgments: The benefits of Brainstorming in groups

Auditing

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 211-224

  Carpenter, Tina D ^a   Reimers, Jane L ^b   Fretwell, Phillip Z ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b ROLLINS COLLEGE   (United States)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Brainstorming; Fraud risk assessments; Group interaction; Internal audit; Response mode bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 80052232240     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: 15587991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/ajpt-10054     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2002. Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99. New York, NY: AICPA.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2003. AICPA Practice Aid Series, Fraud Detection in a GAAS Audit. SAS No. 99 Implementation Guide. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. Bamber, M., R. Watson, and M. C. Hill. 1996. The effects of group support system technology on audit group decision making. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15 (1): 122-134.
4. Carpenter, T. 2007. Audit team brainstorming, fraud risk identification, and fraud risk assessment: Implications of SAS No. 99. The Accounting Review 82 (5): 1119-1140.
5. Church, B. K., and A. Schneider. 1995. Internal auditors' memory for financial statement errors. Behavioral Research In Accounting 17-36.
6. Dennis, A., and J. Valacich. 1993. Computer brainstorms: More heads are better than one. Journal of Applied Psychology 78 (4): 531-537.
7. Diehl, M., and W. Stroebe. 1987. Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of the riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (3): 497-509.
8. Dugosh, D., P. Paulus, E. Roland, and H. Yang. 2000. Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (5): 722-735.
9. Dusenbury, R., and J. Reimers. 2010. The Effect of Response Mode on the Recall of Information in a Professional Judgment Task. Working paper, Florida State University.
10. Gallupe, R., L. Bastianutti, and W. Cooper. 1991. Unblocking brainstorms. Journal of Applied Psychology 76 (1): 137-142.
11. Gramling, A., M. Maletta, A. Schneider, and B. Church. 2004. The role of the internal audit function in corporate governance: A synthesis of the extant internal auditing literature and directions for future research. Journal of Accounting Literature (January): 194-217.
12. Hoffman, V., and M. F. Zimbelman. 2009. Do strategic reasoning and brainstorming help auditors change their standard audit procedures in response to fraud risk? The Accounting Review 84 (3): 811-837.
13. Hunton, J., and A. Gold. 2010. A field experiment comparing the outcomes of three fraud brainstorming procedures: Nominal group, round robin, and open discussion. The Accounting Review 85 (3): 911-935.
14. Hurtt, K. 2010. Development of an instrument to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 29 (1): 149-171.
15. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). 1998. Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. Altamonte Springs: FL. Available at: http://www.theiia.org
16. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). 2003. Editorial Preface. In Research Opportunities in Internal Auditing, edited by A. Bailey, A. Gramling, and S. Ramamoorti. Altamonte Springs, FL: The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation.
17. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). 2006. Organizational governance: Guidance for internal auditors. Position paper. Available at: http://www.theiia.org
18. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). 2009. A world in economic crisis: Key themes for refocusing internal audit strategy. White paper. Available at: http:/www.theiia.org/GAIN
19. Janis, I. L. 1972. Victims of Groupthink. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
20. Janis, I. L. 1982. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
21. Johnson, E. 1994. Auditor memory for audit evidence: Effects of group assistance, time delay, and memory task. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (1): 36-56.
22. Kinney, W. 2003. Auditing risk assessment and risk management process. In Research Opportunities in Internal Auditing, edited by A. Bailey, A. Gramling, and S. Ramamoorn, 131-170. Altamonte Springs, FL: The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation.
23. Kirschner, F., F. Pass, and P. A. Kirschner. 2008. Individual versus group-based learning as a function of task complexity: An exploration into the measurement of group cognitive load. In Beyond Knowledge: The Legacy of Competence, edited by J. Zumbach, N. Swartz, T. Suefert, and L. Kester, 21-28. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Springer.
24. Kirschner, F., F. Pass, and P. A. Kirschner. 2009. Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior 25 (2): 306-314.
25. Levine, J., and R. Moreland. 1990. Progress in small group research. Annual Review of Psychology 41: 585-634.
26. Lynch, A., U. Murthy, and T. Engle. 2009. Fraud brainstorming using computer-mediated communication: The effects of brainstorming technique and facilitation. The Accounting Review 84 (4): 1209-1232.
27. Mullen, B., C. Johnson, and E. Salas. 1991. Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 12 (1): 3-23.
28. Nunamaker, J., A. Dennis, J. Valacich, D. Vogel, and J. George. 1991. Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM 34 (7): 40-61.
29. Osborn, A. 1957. Applied Imagination. Rev. edition. New York, NY: Scribner.
30. Petty, R., S. Harkins, and K. Williams. 1980. The effects of group diffusion of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 38 (1): 81-92.
31. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. 2009. Business Upheaval: Internal Audit Weighs Its Role Amid the Recession and Evolving Enterprise Risks. New York, NY: PwC.
32. Reckers, P., and J. Schultz. 1993. The effects of fraud signals, evidence order, and group-assisted counsel on independent auditor judgment. Behavioral Research In Accounting 5: 125-144.
33. Reimers, J., S. Wheeler, and R. Dusenbury. 1993. The effect of response mode on auditors' control risk assessments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory Fall: 62-75.
34. Sniezek, J., and R. Henry. 1989. Accuracy and confidence in group judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43: 1-28.
35. Trotman, K. 1985. The review process and the accuracy of auditor judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 23 (2): 740-752.
36. Trotman, K., R. Simnett, and A. Khalifa. 2009. Impact of the type of audit team discussions on auditors' generation of material frauds. Contemporary Accounting Research 26 (4): 1115-1142.
37. Trotman, K., and P. Yetton. 1985. The effect of the review process on auditor judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 23 (Spring): 256-267.