Tue, Oct 20, 2026
[Archive]
Volume 8, Issue 3 (10-2026)
Int. J. Ethics Soc 2026, 8(3): 44-56 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Radmard Baghi Z, Ghafourian Shagerdi A. Drivers of the Extended Fraud Pentagon and Auditors’ Perceptions of Fraud Propensity: The Moderating Role of Ethical Values. Int. J. Ethics Soc 2026; 8 (3) :44-56
URL: http://ijethics.com/article-1-430-en.html
URL: http://ijethics.com/article-1-430-en.html
1- M.A in Accounting, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Administrative Sciences, Imam Reza International University, Mashhad, Iran
2- Department of Accounting, Faculty of Administrative Sciences, Imam Reza International University, Mashhad, Iran ,ghafourian@imamreza.ac.ir
2- Department of Accounting, Faculty of Administrative Sciences, Imam Reza International University, Mashhad, Iran ,
Abstract: (6 Views)
Introduction: Fraud is one of the major challenges facing the auditing profession, and auditors’ perceptions of the factors contributing to fraudulent behavior can significantly influence professional judgment, fraud risk assessment, and audit quality. This study aimed to examine the relationship between the six fraud drivers - pressure, opportunity, rationalization, competency, arrogance, and collusion - and auditors’ perceptions of fraud propensity, while also investigating the moderating role of ethical values in these relationships.
Materials and Methods: In terms of purpose, this study was applied research. Regarding its design, it employed a quantitative, cross-sectional, descriptive-correlational approach using a survey method. The target population consisted of auditors employed in audit firms in Mashhad, Iran. The final sample included 326 usable questionnaires collected through non-probability convenience sampling. The research instrument was a structured questionnaire comprising 40 specialized items and 5 demographic questions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, measurement model assessment, and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Data analysis was performed using SPSS and SmartPLS4.
Results: The structural model explained 70.9% of the variance in auditors’ perceptions of fraud propensity. Pressure, collusion, opportunity, rationalization, and competency had positive and statistically significant effects on perceived fraud propensity, whereas the effect of arrogance was not significant. Ethical values exhibited a significant negative direct effect on perceived fraud propensity. Furthermore, the moderating role of ethical values was confirmed in the relationships between pressure, opportunity, rationalization, and competency and perceived fraud propensity. However, the moderating effects of ethical values on the relationships involving arrogance and collusion were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Pressure and collusion emerged as the most influential drivers of auditors’ perceptions of fraud propensity. Ethical values can mitigate the effects of certain fraud drivers; however, controlling collusion requires complementary organizational and regulatory mechanisms. The findings underscore the importance of strengthening professional ethics, managing occupational pressures, and designing effective anti-fraud controls within audit firms.
Materials and Methods: In terms of purpose, this study was applied research. Regarding its design, it employed a quantitative, cross-sectional, descriptive-correlational approach using a survey method. The target population consisted of auditors employed in audit firms in Mashhad, Iran. The final sample included 326 usable questionnaires collected through non-probability convenience sampling. The research instrument was a structured questionnaire comprising 40 specialized items and 5 demographic questions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, measurement model assessment, and partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Data analysis was performed using SPSS and SmartPLS4.
Results: The structural model explained 70.9% of the variance in auditors’ perceptions of fraud propensity. Pressure, collusion, opportunity, rationalization, and competency had positive and statistically significant effects on perceived fraud propensity, whereas the effect of arrogance was not significant. Ethical values exhibited a significant negative direct effect on perceived fraud propensity. Furthermore, the moderating role of ethical values was confirmed in the relationships between pressure, opportunity, rationalization, and competency and perceived fraud propensity. However, the moderating effects of ethical values on the relationships involving arrogance and collusion were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Pressure and collusion emerged as the most influential drivers of auditors’ perceptions of fraud propensity. Ethical values can mitigate the effects of certain fraud drivers; however, controlling collusion requires complementary organizational and regulatory mechanisms. The findings underscore the importance of strengthening professional ethics, managing occupational pressures, and designing effective anti-fraud controls within audit firms.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
General
Received: 2026/05/7 | Accepted: 2026/05/31 | Published: 2026/10/17
Received: 2026/05/7 | Accepted: 2026/05/31 | Published: 2026/10/17
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. |
© 2026 CC BY 4.0 | International Journal of Ethics and Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb