性别、欺诈机会和合理化

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Rashid Ameer, Radiah Othman
{"title":"性别、欺诈机会和合理化","authors":"Rashid Ameer, Radiah Othman","doi":"10.1177/26338076211065180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Framed by opportunity and gender theories, this study examines whether men and women who occupy similar organisational positions differ in the types of fraud committed and their rationalisations. Based on 261 published legal cases of convicted fraudsters in New Zealand, our results show that fraudster's position and rationalisation are important fraud predictors. Our multinomial regression results show that there is a significant difference in the fraud committed in a similar position. There is a relationship between female gambling and embezzlement fraud. A large percentage of fraudsters of both genders offered no rationalisation; those who did, claimed they were victims of circumstances (denial of responsibility) and morally justified their offending. The morally justified rationalisation was associated with lifestyles and pleasing others. Moreover, two rationalisation categories—appeal to higher loyalties and condemning the condemners—are significant in predicting the likelihood of obtaining by deception and embezzlement fraud in the New Zealand context. We also identify two distinct patterns of fraud offending: instrumental-opportunist and pathological-opportunist.","PeriodicalId":29902,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Criminology","volume":"55 1","pages":"81 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gender, fraud opportunity, and rationalisation\",\"authors\":\"Rashid Ameer, Radiah Othman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26338076211065180\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Framed by opportunity and gender theories, this study examines whether men and women who occupy similar organisational positions differ in the types of fraud committed and their rationalisations. Based on 261 published legal cases of convicted fraudsters in New Zealand, our results show that fraudster's position and rationalisation are important fraud predictors. Our multinomial regression results show that there is a significant difference in the fraud committed in a similar position. There is a relationship between female gambling and embezzlement fraud. A large percentage of fraudsters of both genders offered no rationalisation; those who did, claimed they were victims of circumstances (denial of responsibility) and morally justified their offending. The morally justified rationalisation was associated with lifestyles and pleasing others. Moreover, two rationalisation categories—appeal to higher loyalties and condemning the condemners—are significant in predicting the likelihood of obtaining by deception and embezzlement fraud in the New Zealand context. We also identify two distinct patterns of fraud offending: instrumental-opportunist and pathological-opportunist.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Criminology\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"81 - 105\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Criminology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076211065180\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Criminology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26338076211065180","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在机会理论和性别理论的框架下,这项研究考察了在相似的组织职位上,男性和女性在欺诈类型及其合理化方面是否存在差异。基于新西兰261个已公布的被定罪的欺诈者的法律案例,我们的研究结果表明,欺诈者的地位和合理化是重要的欺诈预测因素。我们的多项回归结果表明,在相似的位置上,欺诈行为存在显著差异。女性赌博与贪污诈骗之间存在一定的关系。很大比例的男女骗子都没有给出合理的解释;那些这样做的人,声称他们是环境的受害者(否认责任),并在道德上为他们的罪行辩护。道德上合理的合理化与生活方式和取悦他人有关。此外,在新西兰的背景下,两个合理化类别——呼吁更高的忠诚度和谴责谴责者——在预测通过欺骗和贪污欺诈获得的可能性方面具有重要意义。我们还确定了两种不同的欺诈犯罪模式:工具性机会主义者和病态机会主义者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gender, fraud opportunity, and rationalisation
Framed by opportunity and gender theories, this study examines whether men and women who occupy similar organisational positions differ in the types of fraud committed and their rationalisations. Based on 261 published legal cases of convicted fraudsters in New Zealand, our results show that fraudster's position and rationalisation are important fraud predictors. Our multinomial regression results show that there is a significant difference in the fraud committed in a similar position. There is a relationship between female gambling and embezzlement fraud. A large percentage of fraudsters of both genders offered no rationalisation; those who did, claimed they were victims of circumstances (denial of responsibility) and morally justified their offending. The morally justified rationalisation was associated with lifestyles and pleasing others. Moreover, two rationalisation categories—appeal to higher loyalties and condemning the condemners—are significant in predicting the likelihood of obtaining by deception and embezzlement fraud in the New Zealand context. We also identify two distinct patterns of fraud offending: instrumental-opportunist and pathological-opportunist.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Criminology
Journal of Criminology CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信