The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fraudulent Financial Reporting: Consideration of Industry Traits and Corporate Governance Mechanisms
Abstract
This paper provides insight into financial statement fraud instances investigated during the late 1980s through the 1990s within three volatile industries—technology, health care, and financial services—and highlights important corporate governance differences between fraud companies and no-fraud benchmarks on an industry-by-industry basis. The fraud techniques used vary substantially across industries, with revenue frauds most common in technology companies and asset frauds and misappropriations most common in financial-services firms. For each of these three industries, the sample fraud companies have very weak governance mechanisms relative to no-fraud industry benchmarks. Consistent with prior research, the fraud companies in the technology and financial-services industries have fewer audit committees, while fraud companies in all three industries have less independent audit committees and less independent boards. In addition, this study provides initial evidence that the fraud companies in the technology and health-care industries have fewer audit committee meetings, and fraud companies in all three industries have less internal audit support. This study of more current financial statement fraud instances contributes by updating our understanding of fraud techniques and risk factors in three key industries. Auditors should consider the industry context as they evaluate the risk of financial fraud, and they should compare clients' governance mechanisms to relevant no-fraud industry benchmarks.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Disclosure of Material Weaknesses in Internal Control after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
Ge, W., & McVay, S. (2005) · Accounting Horizons · doi:10.2308/acch.2005.19.3.137 · Cited by 715
Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview
Brennan, N. M., & Solomon, J. (2008) · Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal · doi:10.1108/09513570810907401 · Cited by 538
Corporate Governance in the Post‐Sarbanes‐Oxley Era: Auditors’ Experiences*
COHEN, J., KRISHNAMOORTHY, G., & WRIGHT, A. (2010) · Contemporary Accounting Research · doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01026.x · Cited by 486
Board Committees, CEO Compensation, and Earnings Management
Laux, C., & Laux, V. (2009) · The Accounting Review · doi:10.2308/accr.2009.84.3.869 · Cited by 322
MetaFraud: A Meta-Learning Framework for Detecting Financial Fraud1
Abbasi, A., Albrecht, C., Vance, A., & Hansen, J. (2012) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/41703508 · Cited by 298
Metadata
- Authors
- Beasley, M. S., Carcello, J. V., Hermanson, D. R., & Lapides, P. D.
- Venue
- Accounting Horizons
- Publisher
- American Accounting Association
- Published
- 2000-12-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 441-454
- ISSN
- 0888-7993 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-7975
- OpenAlex
- W2148064970
- Cited by
- 1,181
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 36.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fraudulent Financial Reporting: Consideration of Industry Traits and Corporate Governance Mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/acch.2000.14.4.441
- The paper
- Beasley, M. S., Carcello, J. V., Hermanson, D. R., & Lapides, P. D. (2000). Fraudulent Financial Reporting: Consideration of Industry Traits and Corporate Governance Mechanisms. Accounting Horizons. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch.2000.14.4.441
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.