Sayed Mahmoud Mousavi Shiri; Mahdieh Yazdani; Mahin Mirzaee
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to exam Auditors’ Performance in fraud brainstorming sessions. The audit team needs some discussion and dialogue sessions to discuss how and when the financial statements of an entity can be susceptible to significant financial misstatement due to fraud or error .In this ...
Read More
The aim of this paper is to exam Auditors’ Performance in fraud brainstorming sessions. The audit team needs some discussion and dialogue sessions to discuss how and when the financial statements of an entity can be susceptible to significant financial misstatement due to fraud or error .In this study, we refer to paragraph 19 of Auditing Standard 240; evaluate the effect of brainstorming sessions in the performance of auditors, in discovering the fraud. For gathering of data one scenario was provided and distributed between 216 people of administrators and auditors working in the public audit firms of Certified Public Accountants that divided to four groups. The responds of Nominal Group Technique and interactive Groups for fraud risk factors, Quality of Fraud Hypothesis were compared. The methods used to test hypotheses were independent t-test and continual multivariate. Overall, our results show that nominal teams outperform interacting teams. We also provide evidence that social loafing there are in interacting teams.
