Advertisement

Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 87, Issue 1, pp 15–30 | Cite as

An Examination of the Association Between Gender and Reporting Intentions for Fraudulent Financial Reporting

  • Steven KaplanEmail author
  • Kurt Pany
  • Janet Samuels
  • Jian Zhang
Article

Abstract

We report the results of a study that examines the association between gender and individuals’ intentions to report fraudulent financial reporting using non-anonymous and anonymous reporting channels. In our experimental study, we examine whether reporting intentions in response to discovering a fraudulent financial reporting act are associated with the participants’ gender, the perpetrator’s gender, and/or the interaction between the participants’ and perpetrator’s gender. We find that female participants’ reporting intentions for an anonymous channel are higher than for male participants; the fraud perpetrator’s gender and the interaction with participants’ gender were not significantly associated with anonymous channel reporting intentions. Neither of the two factors nor the interaction between the two factors was associated with reporting intentions to a non- anonymous reporting channel. Results from an additional analysis indicate that male and female participants differ in the extent to which they judge the reduction in personal costs of an anonymous reporting channel compared to a non-anonymous reporting channel and that the reduction in personal costs mediates the relationship between participant gender and anonymous reporting intentions.

Keywords

whistleblowing gender fraudulentreporting anonymous reporting channel  non-anonymous reporting channel 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners: 2005, Detecting & Deterring Fraud Using Hotlines (Continuing Education Course, Austin, Texas)Google Scholar
  2. Association of Certified Fraud Examiners: 2006, Report to the Nation on Occupational Fraud and Abuse (ACFE, Austin, Texas)Google Scholar
  3. Audit Analytics: 2008, 2007 Financial Restatements: A Seven Year Comparison (February)Google Scholar
  4. Ayers, S., & Kaplan, S.E. (2005). ‹Wrongdoing by Consultants: An Examination of Employees’ Reporting Intentions’. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 121–137. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-4600-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey, A.D., Jr, Gramling, A.A., & Ramamoorti, S.2003. Research Opportunities in Internal Auditing.(The Institute on Internal Auditing Research Foundation Altamonte Springs, FloridaGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnett, J.H., & Karson, M.J. (1987). Personal Values and Business Decisions: An Exploratory Investigation. Journal of Business Ethics, 6, 371–382. doi: 10.1007/BF00382894 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barnett, J.H., & Karson, M.J. (1989). Managers, Values and Executive Decisions: An Exploration of the Role of Gender, Career Strategy, Organizational Level, Function, and the Importance of Ethics, Relationships, and Results in Managerial Decision Making. Journal of Business Ethics, 8, 711–747. doi: 10.1007/BF00383775 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barry, B., A. Carrico, W. Smith and N. Goates: 2006, ‹Ethics Across the Boundaries of Social Identity: The Role of Intergroup Bias in the Perception of Unethical Behavior’. Paper Presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the International Association of Conflict Management, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  10. Begue, L. (2001). Social Judgment of Abortion: A Black-Sheep Effect in a Catholic Sheepfold. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141, 640–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beu, D., Buckley, M., & Harvey, M. (2003). Ethical Decision-Making: a Multidimensional Construct. Business Ethics European Review (Chichester, England), 12, 88–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Biernat, M., & Fuegen, K. (2001). Shifting Standards and the Evaluation of Competence: Complexity in Gender-Based Judgment and Decision Making. The Journal of Social Issues, 57, 707–724. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chiu, R.K. (2003). Ethical Judgment and Whistleblowing Intention: Examining the Moderating Role of Locus of Control. Journal of Business Ethics, 43, 65–74. doi: 10.1023/A:1022911215204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coate, C.J., & Frey, K.J. (2000). Some Evidence on the Ethical Disposition of Accounting Students: Context and Gender Implications. Teaching Business Ethics, 4, 379–403. doi: 10.1023/A:1009827807550 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collins, D. (2000). The Quest to Improve the Human Condition: The First 1,500 Articles Published in the Journal of Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 1–73. doi: 10.1023/A:1006358104098 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Curtis, M.B. (2006). ‹Are Audit-related Ethical Decisions Dependent upon Mood? Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 191–209. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9066-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dawson, L.M. (1997). Ethical Differences Between Men and Women in the Sales Profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1143–1152. doi: 10.1023/A:1005721916646 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dobson, J., & White, J. (1995). Toward the Feminine Firm: An Extension to Tomas White. Business Ethics Quarterly, 5, 463–478. doi: 10.2307/3857394 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gilligan, C. 1982, ‹In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development’ Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Global Compliance: 2007, ‹Alert Line, Allegation Reporting’, http://www.globalcompliance.com/alertline-allegation-reporting.html. Accessed 20 Aug 2007
  21. Harris, J., & Sutton, C. (1995). Unraveling the Ethical Decision Making Process: Clues from an Empirical Study Comparing Fortune 1000 Executives and MBA Students. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 805–817. doi: 10.1007/BF00872347 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hegarty, W·H., & Sims, H·P., Jr. (1979). Organizational Philosophy, Policies and Objectives Related to Unethical Decision Behavior: A Laboratory Experiment. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 64, 331–338. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.64.3.331 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Heilman, M. (1995). ‹Sex Stereotypes and Their Effects in the Workplace: What We Know and What We Don’t Know’. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 3–26Google Scholar
  24. Heilman, M. (1997). Sex Discrimination and the Affirmative Action Remedy: The Role of Sex Stereotypes. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 877–889. doi: 10.1023/A:1017927002761 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Heilman, M. (2001). ‹Description and Prescription: How Gender Stereotypes Prevent Women’s Ascent up the Organizational Ladder’. The Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674. doi: 10.1111/0022-4537.00234 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Heilman, M., Block, C., & Martell, R. (1995). Sex Stereotypes: Do They Influence Perceptions of Managers? Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10, 237–252Google Scholar
  27. Hewstone, M., Rubin, M., & Willis, H. (2002). Intergroup Bias. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 575–604. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffman, J. (1998). Are Women Really More Ethical than Men? Maybe It Depends on the Situation. Journal of Managerial Issues, 10, 60–73Google Scholar
  29. Hull, R., & Umansky, P. (1997). An Examination of Gender Stereotyping as an Explanation for Vertical Job Segregation in Public Accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22(6), 507–528. doi: 10.1016/S0361-3682(96)00028-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaplan, S.E., & Schultz, J.J. (2007). Intentions to Report Questionable Acts: An Examination of the Influence of Anonymous Reporting Channel, Internal Audit Quality, and Setting. Journal of Business Ethics, 71, 109–124. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-0021-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaplan, S. E., and S. M. Whitecotton: 2001, ‹An Examination of Auditors Reporting Intentions when Another Auditor is Offered Client Employment’, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20, 45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. King, G. (1997). The Effects of Interpersonal Closeness and Issue Seriousness on Blowing the Whistle. Journal of Business Communications, 34, 419–436. doi: 10.1177/002194369703400406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mason, E.S., & Mudrack, P.E. (1996). Gender and Ethical Orientation: A Test of Gender and Occupational Socialization Theories. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 599–604. doi: 10.1007/BF00411793 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mathews, D., & Dietz-Uhler, B. (1998). ‹The Black-Sheep Effect: How Positive and Negative Advertisements Affect Voters’ Perceptions of the Sponsor of the Advertisement’. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1903–1915. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01352.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mesmer-Magnus and Voiswesvran (2005). Whistleblowing in Organizations: An Examination of Correlates of Whistleblowing Intentions, Actions and Retaliation. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 277–297. doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-0849-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Miceli, M.P., Dozier, J.B., & Near, J.P. (1991). Blowing the Whistle on Data Fudging: a Controlled Field Experiment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 271–295. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1991.tb00521.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Miceli, M., & Near, J. (1984). The Relationships among Beliefs, Organizational Position, and Whistle-Blowing Status: A Discriminant Analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 27(4), 687–705. doi: 10.2307/255873 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Miceli, M., & Near, J. (1988). Individual and Situational Correlates if Whistleblowing. Personnel Psychology, 41, 267–281. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb02385.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Miceli, M., & Near, J. (1992). Blowing the Whistle: The Organizational and Legal Implications for Companies and Employees (Lexington Books, New York)Google Scholar
  40. Miethe, T.D., & Rothschild, J. (1994). Whistleblowing and the Control of Organizational Misconduct. Sociological Inquiry, 643, 322–347. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.1994.tb00395.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Moberly, R.E. (2006). ‹Sarbanes-Oxley’s Structural Model to Encourage Corporate Whistleblowers’. Brigham Young University Law Review, 5, 1107–1180Google Scholar
  42. Near, J.P., & Miceli, M.P. (1985). Organizational Dissidence: The Case of Whistleblowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4, 1–16. doi: 10.1007/BF00382668 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Nitsch, D., Baetz, M., & Hughes, J.C. (2005). Why Code of Conduct Violations go Unreported: A Conceptual Framework to Guide Intervention and Future Research. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 327–341. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-8203-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nosek, B., & Banaji, M. (2001). The Go/No-Go Association Task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–664. doi: 10.1521/soco.19.6.625.20886 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Fallon, M.J., & Butterfield, K.D. (2003). A Review of the Empirical Ethical Decision-Making Literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 375–413. doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-2929-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Owen, C., & Todor, W. (1994). Attitudes Toward Women as Managers: Still the Same. Business Horizons, 36, 12–16. doi: 10.1016/S0007-6813(05)80032-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ponemon, L.: 1994, ‹A Comment on ‹Whistleblowing’ as an Internal Control Mechanism: Individual and Organizational Considerations’, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13, 118–130Google Scholar
  48. PricewaterhouseCoopers: 2007, Economic Crime: People, Culture and Controls: The 4th Biennial Global Economic Crime Survey. Martin Luther University Economy and Crime Research CenterGoogle Scholar
  49. Radtke, R. (2000). ‹The Effects of Gender and Setting on Accountants’ Ethically Sensitive Decisions’. Journal of Business Ethics, 24, 299–312. doi: 10.1023/A:1006277331803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rawwas, M. (1996). Consumer Ethics: An Empirical Investigation of the Ethical Beliefs of Austrian Consumers. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 1009–1019. doi: 10.1007/BF00705579 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Read, W.J., & Rama, D.V. (2003). Whistle-Blowing to Internal Auditors. Managerial Auditing Journal, 18, 354–362. doi: 10.1108/02686900310476828 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Richeson, J., & Ambady, N. (2001). ‹Who’s in Charge? Effects of Situational Roles on Automatic Gender Bias’. Sex Roles, 44, 493–512. doi: 10.1023/A:1012242123824 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ritter, B.A. (2006). Can Business Ethics be Trained? A Study of the Ethical Decision-Making Process in Business Students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68, 153–164. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9062-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rothschild, J., & Miethe, T.D. (1999). Whistle-Blower Disclosures and Management Retaliation. Work and Occupations, 26, 107–128. doi: 10.1177/0730888499026001006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rudman, L., & Goodwin, S. (2004). Gender Differences in Automatic In-Group Bias: Why Do Women Like Women More than Men Like Men? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 494–509. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.4.494 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schruijer, S., M. Blanz, A. Mummendey, A., B. Banfai, H. Dittmar. (1994). The Group-Serving Bias in Evaluating and Explaining Harmful Behavior. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 47-54Google Scholar
  57. Schultz, J.J., Johnson, D.A., Morris, D., & Dyrnes, S. (1993). An Investigation of the Reporting of Questionable Acts in an International Setting. Journal of Accounting Research, 31(Supplement), 75–103. doi: 10.2307/2491165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Scott, K., & Brown, D. (2006). Female First, Leader Second? Gender Bias in the Encoding of Leadership Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 101, 230–242. doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Singer, M., Mitchell, S., & Turner, J. (1998). Consideration of Moral Intensity in Ethicality Judgments: Its Relationship with Whistle-blowing and Need-for-Cognition. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 527–541Google Scholar
  60. Slovin, D.: 2006, ‹Blowing the Whistle’, The Internal Auditor (June), 45–49Google Scholar
  61. Smith, H.J., Keil, M., & DePledge, G. (2001). Keeping Mum as the Project Goes Under: Toward an Explanatory Model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18, 189–227Google Scholar
  62. Smith, P.L., & Oakley, E.F. (1997). Gender Related Differences in Ethical and Social Values of Business Students: Implications for Management. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 37–45. doi: 10.1023/A:1017995530951 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stanga, K.G., & Turpen, R.A. (1991). Ethical Judgments on Selected Accounting Issues: An Empirical Study. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 739–747. doi: 10.1007/BF00705708 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tajfel, H. J. and J. Turner: 1979, ‹An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict’, in S. Worchel, W. G. Austin Eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Brooks/Cole, Monterey)Google Scholar
  65. The Network: 2006a, Best Practices in Ethics Hotlines, A Framework for Creating an Effective Anonymous Reporting Program (www.reportline.net)Google Scholar
  66. The Network: 2006b, 2006 Corporate Governance and Compliance Hotline Benchmarking Report (www. reportline.net)Google Scholar
  67. Van Kenhove, P., Vermeir, I., & Vermiers, S. (2001). An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Ethical Beliefs, Ethical Ideology, Political Preference and Need for Closure. Journal of Business Ethics, 32, 347–361. doi: 10.1023/A:1010720908680 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Vera-Munoz, S.C. (2005). Corporate Governance Reforms: Redefined Expectations of Audit Committee Responsibilities and Effectiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 115–127. doi: 10.1007/s10551-005-0177-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Vermeir, I. and P. Van Kenhove: 2008, 'Gender Differences in Double Standards’, Journal of Business Ethics 81, 281–295Google Scholar
  70. West, T., Ravenscroft, S·P., & Shrader, C·B. (2004). Cheating and Moral Judgment in the College Classroom: A Natural Experiment. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 173–183. doi: 10.1007/s10551-004-9463-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Kaplan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kurt Pany
    • 1
  • Janet Samuels
    • 2
  • Jian Zhang
    • 3
  1. 1.W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State UniversityTempeU.S.A.
  2. 2.School of Management and Leadership, Arizona State UniversityGlendaleU.S.A.
  3. 3.College of Business, San Jose State UniversitySan JoseU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations