Constituents in the judicial process such as jurors and lawyers who often play a critical role in the aftermath of an alleged financial reporting fraud have largely been ignored in the accounting literature. Literature in psychology suggests that both laypeople and highly trained professionals frequently over-attribute causality of an observed behavior to the disposition of the person performing that behavior. In doing so, these individuals underestimate the power of situations and fail to recognize important environmental factors that lead to a particular behavior. Within the context of fraudulent financial reporting, there is little understanding of how jurors and lawyers initially perceive and react to fraudulent behavior. Consequently, it is possible jurors and lawyers who are asked to evaluate the causality of a suspected fraudulent event, are inaccurate in their assessment of the causality of that event. This study addresses the question of whether or not the various constituents in the judicial process are biased in their attributions when evaluating causal factors related to financial reporting decisions. More specifically, it focuses on how individuals outside the profession of accounting, laymen jurors and corporate lawyers, make attributions when observing decisions related to fraudulent financial reporting, and whether or not these attributions differ from those made by corporate accountants. Further, after identifying differences in attributions, this study attempts to determine the causes of these differences; and whether recent changes in business culture have been effective in curbing financial reporting fraud. The late 1990s and early 2000s saw a proliferation of high profile financial reporting frauds, and as a result, numerous changes have been made within the regulatory environment governing financial reporting. Many of these changes targeted overall business culture and a commitment to ethical financial reporting. By studying the attributions of corporate accountants we learn about their perceptions of the current environment and better understand their willingness to report something in a manner that would constitute financial reporting fraud. Evidence demonstrates that laymen, corporate lawyers, and corporate accountants differ in their attributions and that laymen are typically more biased when observing individuals and their financial reporting decisions. Laymen are also shown to lack awareness of recent changes in the financial reporting environment, have unrealistic expectations of the likelihood accountants are willing to intentionally misreport something, and are not as good at identifying appropriate and inappropriate financial reporting behaviors. Results also suggest recent changes in business culture and governance around financial reporting have been effective in convincing corporate accountants that environmental factors should not lead to, and are not a viable excuse for, fraudulent financial reporting. / Ph. D.

Financial reporting fraud is a concern for investors, regulators, external auditors, and the public. Although the responsibility for fraud detection lies upon management and those charged with governance, external auditors are likely to come under scrutiny if fraud scandals come to light. Despite the audit regulators efforts in fighting fraud, evidence from prior literature revealed that external auditors still need guidance in assessing and responding to fraud risks. Hence the current study aims at helping external auditors properly assess and respond to the risk of financial reporting fraud in an effort to increase the likelihood of detecting it. In order to achieve this, the current study sought to explore the significance of various fraud factors in assessing the risks of financial reporting fraud and examined how external auditors could assess these fraud factors. The current study also explored the likely motivations behind management fraud, the impact of management motivations on the financial statements, and how external auditors could assess the impact of management motivations. The data for the current study was collected from external auditors working at various audit firms in Egypt via the use of mixed research methods, namely through an online questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. The findings of the current study revealed that management motives are the most significant factor in assessing the risk of financial reporting fraud. Hence the current study suggests that external audit should be viewed in terms of management motivations rather than just the audit of financial statements figures and disclosures. The current study offers detailed guidance to external auditors in this area. The findings of the current study also revealed that management integrity is a significant factor in assessing the risk of financial reporting fraud and that rationalisation of fraud should be assessed as part of management integrity rather than a separate fraud risk factor. The current study found that fraud perpetrators capabilities are equally significant to the opportunity to commit fraud factor yet it is currently ignored by the audit standards and thus should be assessed as part of opportunity to commit fraud. The current study was the first to explore financial reporting fraud and the extent by which external auditors comply with ISA 240 in the Egyptian context. The current study offered recommendations to external auditors, audit firms, audit regulators, and the Egyptian government on how to combat financial reporting fraud. Potential areas for future research were also identified by the current study.

Financial reporting fraud leads to not only significant investment risks for external stockholders, but also financial crises for the capital market. Although the issue of fraudulent financial reporting has drawn much attention, relevant research is much less than issues of predicting financial distress or bankruptcy. Furthermore, one purpose of exploring the financial reporting fraud with various forms is to obtain a better understand of the corporate through investigating its financial and corporate governance indicators. This study addresses the challenge with proposing an approach with the following four phases: (1) to identify a set of financial and corporate governance indicators that are significantly correlated with the financial reporting fraud; (2) to use the Growing Hierarchical Self-Organizing Map (GHSOM) to cluster the normal and fraud listed corporate data; (3) to extract knowledge about the financial reporting fraud through observing the hierarchical relationship displayed in the trained GHSOM; and (4) to make the justification of the extracted knowledge. The proposed approach is feasible because researchers claim that the GHSOM can discover the hidden hierarchical relationship from data with high dimensionality.