Why computer-mediated communication improves the effectiveness of fraud brainstorming

Current auditing standards require auditors to conduct a fraud brainstorming session aimed at considering ways in which the audit client's financial statements might be fraudulently misstated. Lynch et al. (2009) document that computer-mediated fraud brainstorming is significantly more effective than face-to-face brainstorming for generating relevant fraud risks. In this study, we code and analyze process-level data from the Lynch et al. (2009) study to understand the factors contributing to the greater effectiveness of electronic fraud brainstorming. Specifically, we conduct mediation analysis to discern the degree to which equality of participation and two measures of task focus contribute to greater fraud brainstorming effectiveness when using a computer-mediated communication system compared to traditional face-to-face brainstorming. We also examine participants' perceptions of ease of system use, satisfaction with the process, and satisfaction with the outcome. Overall, the results indicate that the primary reason for the greater effectiveness of electronic fraud brainstorming is the greater degree of task focus as revealed through the length of comments made when using computer-mediated fraud brainstorming. In an absolute sense, participants using electronic brainstorming felt that their brainstorming mode was easy to use and they were satisfied with the process and outcome. The primary contribution of this study is in enhancing our understanding of precisely why computer-mediated fraud brainstorming outperforms face-to-face fraud brainstorming.

[2]  Jerald Greenberg,et al.  The Role of Role Playing in Organizational Research , 1993 .

[3]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  An Examination of the Impact of Stimuli Type and GSS Structure on Creativity: Brainstorming Versus Non-Brainstorming Techniques in a GSS Environment , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[4]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Investigating the Moderators of the Group Support Systems Use with Meta-Analysis , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[5]  James T. C. Teng,et al.  The Relationship of Information System Training Methods and Cognitive Ability to End-User Satisfaction, Comprehension, and Skill Transfer: A Longitudinal Field Study , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[6]  A. Hayes.  Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium , 2009 .

[7]  Richard L. Daft,et al.  Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design , 1986 .

[8]  Tina D Carpenter,et al.  Audit Team Brainstorming, Fraud Risk Identification, and Fraud Risk Assessment: Implications of SAS No. 99 , 2007 .

[9]  John Short,et al.  The social psychology of telecommunications , 1976 .

[10]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  User satisfaction with computer-mediated communication systems , 1990 .

[11]  Murray Turoff,et al.  Coordination Structures and System Restrictiveness in Distributed Group Support Systems , 2002 .

[12]  Mark S. Beasley,et al.  A Primer for Brainstorming Fraud Risks: There Are Good and Bad Ways to Conduct Brainstorming Sessions , 2003 .

[13]  Jan Kratzer,et al.  Virtuality, communication, and new product team creativity: a social network perspective , 2003 .

[14]  Alexander I. Rudnicky,et al.  A Comparison of Speech and Typed Input , 1990, HLT.

[15]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  ELECTRONIC BRAINSTORMING AND GROUP SIZE , 1992 .

[16]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings , 1988, MIS Q..

[17]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[18]  J. Valacich,et al.  Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story , 1994 .

[19]  Jerry Fjermestad,et al.  An analysis of communication mode in group support systems research , 2004, Decis. Support Syst..

[20]  Fred D. Davis,et al.  A Model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test† , 1996 .

[21]  R. Baumeister,et al.  Personal narratives about guilt: Role in action control and interpersonal relationships. , 1995 .

[22]  Barbara H Wixom,et al.  A Theoretical Integration of User Satisfaction and Technology Acceptance , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[23]  P. Paulus,et al.  Performance and Perceptions of Brainstormers in an Organizational Setting , 1995 .

[24]  R. Briggs,et al.  Meeting Satisfaction for Technology-Supported Groups , 2006 .

[25]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Affective Reward and the Adoption of Group Support Systems: Productivity Is Not Always Enough , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[26]  Brian Ballou,et al.  Helecom Communications: Considering Fraud Risk on an Engagement before and after Analyzing a Key Business Process , 2005 .

[27]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  A Study of Collaborative Group Work With and Without Computer-Based Support , 1990, Inf. Syst. Res..

[28]  Laku Chidambaram,et al.  Relational Development in Computer-Supported Groups , 1996, MIS Q..

[29]  Monica J. Garfield,et al.  Modifying Paradigms: Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[30]  Robert M. Fuller,et al.  The effects of data model representation method on task performance , 2010, Inf. Manag..

[31]  Poppy Lauretta McLeod,et al.  An Assessment of the Experimental Literature on Electronic Support of Group Work: Results of a Meta-Analysis , 1992, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[32]  Dan N. Stone,et al.  Team discourse explains media richness and anonymity effects in audit fraud cue brainstorming , 2011, Int. J. Account. Inf. Syst..

[33]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[34]  Joseph S. Valacich,et al.  Enhancing the Motivational Affordance of Information Systems: The Effects of Real-Time Performance Feedback and Goal Setting in Group Collaboration Environments , 2010, Manag. Sci..

[35]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Production blocking and idea generation: Does blocking interfere with cognitive processes? , 2003 .

[36]  James E. Hunton,et al.  A Field Experiment Comparing the Outcomes of Three Fraud Brainstorming Procedures: Nominal Group, Round Robin, and Open Discussion (Retracted) , 2013 .

[37]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[38]  Bruce A. Reinig,et al.  Toward an Understanding of Satisfaction with the Process and Outcomes of Teamwork , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[39]  A. Pinsonneault,et al.  Small Group Brainstorming and Idea Quality , 2001 .

[40]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems via Meta-Analysis , 2001, MIS Q..

[41]  S. Green,et al.  The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process , 1980 .

[42]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Cognitive stimulation and interference in idea generating groups , 2003 .

[43]  Blake Ives,et al.  Web-based Virtual Learning Environments: a Research Framework and a Preliminary Assessment of Effectiveness in Basic It Skills Training Author(s): Piccoli Et Al./web-based Virtual Learning Environments Web-based Virtual Learning Environments: a Research Framework and a Preliminary Assessment of Effe , 2022 .

[44]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[45]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. , 1986, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[46]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[47]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems , 1991, CACM.

[48]  Uday S. Murthy,et al.  Fraud Brainstorming Using Computer‐Mediated Communication: The Effects of Brainstorming Technique and Facilitation , 2009 .

[49]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..