article · Journal of Accounting
Purpose: This study examines the effect of auditing standards on fraud detection within enterprises in the Littoral, Centre, and West regions of Cameroon. Despite the adoption of the Revised OHADA Uniform Act and International Standards on Auditing (ISA), financial irregularities persist, creating a significant audit expectation gap. Methodology: Adopting a quantitative research design, data were collected via structured questionnaires from 146 professional respondents, including accountants and internal controllers, using a proportional stratified sampling technique. The study utilized a multiple linear regression model to examine the effect of audit standard components on fraud detection outcome. Findings: The findings reveal that audit standards have a positive and statistically significant impact on fraud detection, explaining approximately 52% of the variation in detection outcomes. Specifically, dimensions such as the Audit Execution System encompassing planning, risk assessment, and procedures showed the strongest predictive power for identifying irregularities. Comparative analysis further indicates that these effects are more consistent in enterprises audited by the Big Four firms. The results underscore that while formal standards provide a necessary framework, effective fraud detection is heavily contingent upon the rigor of application and professional scepticism. Unique Contribution to Theory, Policy and Practice: The study recommends that Cameroonian auditors transition from "checklist compliance" toward a risk-based approach as mandated by ISA 315 and suggests that regulatory bodies like ONECCA enforce mandatory quality assurance for non-Big Four firms to bridge existing methodological gaps. This study contribute to breach the literature gap in the study of audit standards in relation to fraud detection in Cameroon. Furthermore, it determines that compliance with audit standards improve fraud detection in Cameroon.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.47941/jacc.3776
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.