The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Some Cross-Cultural Evidence on Whistle-Blowing as an Internal Control Mechanism
Abstract
In this paper, I report on the results of an empirical examination of cultural influences on professional judgments of Australian, Indian, and Chinese-Malaysian accountants in relation to whistle-blowing as an internal control mechanism. Australia serves as a proxy for the Anglo-American cluster of countries comprising the U.S., U.K., and Canada, while India and Malaysia represent the Asian-Indian and Chinese clusters, respectively. I draw on cultural characteristics and differences among these societies to formulate hypotheses that Australian professional accountants are both more likely and more accepting of engaging in whistle-blowing as an internal control mechanism than Chinese-Malaysian and Indian professional accountants. Data were gathered through a survey questionnaire administered to samples of senior professional accountants from Big 6 (at the time of data collection) firms in Australia, India, and Malaysia. The questionnaire comprised two whistle-blowing scenarios, and used both single-attribute and multidimensional attribute measures of professional judgment. The results support my hypotheses about differences in Australian compared to Indian and Chinese-Malaysian professional judgments. Additionally, the results support my expectation that multidimensional attribute measures would have greater explanatory power than single-attribute measures, and would provide insight into complex elements involved in ethical and professional judgments in cross-cultural settings. My findings from this study have implications for the management of local and multinational enterprises. Enterprises that aim to improve effectiveness in their control systems or achieve similar levels of reliability across divisions in various countries need to implement control systems that are compatible with cultural values. Specifically, the results suggest that compared to Indian and Chinese cultures, whistle-blowing as an internal control mechanism is likely to be more effective in Australian culture.
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
Cites
The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept
Hofstede, G. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1984.4279653 · Cited by 1,257
Cited by
Taras, V., Kirkman, B. L., & Steel, P. (2010) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0018938 · Cited by 1,160
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
Bhal, K. T., & Dadhich, A. (2011) · Journal of Business Ethics · doi:10.1007/s10551-011-0876-z · Cited by 201
Metadata
- Authors
- Patel, C.
- Venue
- Journal of International Accounting Research
- Publisher
- American Accounting Association
- Published
- 2003-01-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 69-96
- ISSN
- 1542-6297 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-8025
- OpenAlex
- W2022096662
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.82
- 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: Some Cross-Cultural Evidence on Whistle-Blowing as an Internal Control Mechanism. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2308/jiar.2003.2.1.69
- The paper
- Patel, C. (2003). Some Cross-Cultural Evidence on Whistle-Blowing as an Internal Control Mechanism. Journal of International Accounting Research. https://doi.org/10.2308/jiar.2003.2.1.69
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.