HOME JOURNALS CONTACT

Information Technology Journal

Year: 2013 | Volume: 12 | Issue: 23 | Page No.: 7661-7664
DOI: 10.3923/itj.2013.7661.7664
Evolutionary Game Analysis on Auditing Collusion under Dual Auditing System
Luo Fu-bi

Abstract: Dual auditing system can be seen as a system designed to prevent the auditing collusion. The players of auditing collusion are always bounded rationality. Based on the fact of bounded rationality, in this study, the strategy choices of the auditors’ are studied by using evolutionary game theory. The results are: (1) If the auditors’ returns of auditing collusion are greater than the punishments arising from auditing collusion, the bounded rational auditors will select the collusion strategy after a long-term of repeated game. (2) Under the dual auditing system both reward and penalty existed, we can maximize the prevention of auditing collusion when the reward given to the non-conspirators is greater than the fine given to the conspirators, and the penalty given to the conspirators is more than the income of auditing collusion simultaneously. (3) Giving more rewards to the non-conspirators can also play the role of preventing auditing collusion.

Fulltext PDF

How to cite this article
Luo Fu-bi , 2013. Evolutionary Game Analysis on Auditing Collusion under Dual Auditing System. Information Technology Journal, 12: 7661-7664.

Keywords: Auditing collusion, evolutionary game and dual auditing system

REFERENCES

  • Kessler, A.S., 2000. On monitoring and collusion in hierarchie. J. Econ. Theory, 91: 280-291.
    CrossRef    


  • Chen, H.C. and S.M. Liu, 2007. Dynamic incentive contracts in multiple penalty systems with no-commitment to tenure-track auditing. J. Econ., 90: 255-294.
    CrossRef    


  • Khalil, F. and J. Lawarree, 2006. Incentives for corruptible auditors in the absence of commitment. J. Ind. Econ., 54: 269-291.
    CrossRef    


  • Dittmann, I., 1999. How reliable should auditors be?: Optimal monitoring in principal-agent relationships. Eur. J. Political Econ., 15: 523-546.
    CrossRef    


  • Khalil, F., 1997. Auditing without commitment. RAND J. Econ., 28: 629-640.
    Direct Link    


  • Kofman, F. and J. Lawarree, 1993. Collusion in hierarchical agency. Econometrica, 61: 629-656.
    Direct Link    


  • Kofman, F. and J. Lawarree, 1996. On the optimality of allowing collusion. J. Public Econ., 61: 383-407.
    CrossRef    


  • Lambert-Mogiljansky, A., 1994. Corruption in procurement-the economics of regulatory blackmail. Research Paper no 1994: 4RE, University of Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden.


  • Luo, F.B. and Y. Zhu, 2013. Evolutionary game analysis on auditing collusion. J. Applied Sci., 13: 4759-4763.
    CrossRef    Direct Link    


  • Kuhn, M. and L. Siciliani, 2013. Manipulation and auditing of public sector contracts. Eur. J. Political Econ., 32: 251-267.
    CrossRef    


  • Strausz, R., 1997. Collusion and renegotiation in a principal-supervisor-agent relationship. Scand. J. Econ., 99: 497-518.
    CrossRef    

  • © Science Alert. All Rights Reserved