in black and white
Main menu
Share a book About us Home
Biology Business Chemistry Computers Culture Economics Fiction Games Guide History Management Mathematical Medicine Mental Fitnes Physics Psychology Scince Sport Technics

Fraud Exprosed Whot you Dont Could Cost your company millions - Joseph W.

Joseph W. Fraud Exprosed Whot you Dont Could Cost your company millions - Wiley Publishing, 2003. - 289 p.
ISBN: 0-471-27475-5
Download (direct link): fraudexposedwhatyoudont2003.pdf
Previous << 1 .. 90 91 92 93 94 95 < 96 > 97 98 99 100 101 102 .. 147 >> Next

Another aspect of neuroscience research may be worth reflecting on—the manner in which our brains are evidently wired to ignore the routine and pay close attention to the unusual. We speculated earlier on the role of strangeness in occupational fraud. We may be wary of the stranger but comfortable with the face we have seen down the hall for seven years; yet in all likelihood the latter may represent a greater threat from an occupational fraud perspective. Research is still ongoing, and again we tread an area full of ethical and privacy issues, but certainly more continuing attention is warranted to such promising findings. We may discover that delving into the world of neuroscience begins to bring us into contact with the advertising business.
Advertising, with the apparently simple objective of influencing consumer choice, has utilized a variety of research techniques over the years to help improve the effectiveness and efficiency of its messages. In the 1950s motivational research was the rage, with psychologists advising companies on how to tweak their packaging and messages to enhance subliminal content. Such techniques enjoyed considerable popularity until Vance Packard skewered them in his 1957 bestseller, The Hidden Persuaders, and compared them to George Orwell’s Big Brother. A decade or two later, physiology was the rage, with researchers using a variety of instruments to measure subjects’ physical reactions to varying advertisements and products. More recently, the preferred methodology involved the use of questionnaires and focus groups to test campaigns and messages.41
There is now developing a school of thought, based on research in neuroscience, that holds such measures are inherently flawed, since they involve the conscious mind. As Tom Brailsford, director of technological research at Hallmark, noted with regard to consumers, “It’s not that consumers won’t tell you what’s on their minds. It’s that they can’t.”42
Many of the advances in this approach are credited to Gerald Zaltman, a marketing professor at the Harvard Business School. One writer described Zaltman
and his work, noting that he created the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique, which attempts to measure attitudes about products and services.There are many who belileve this is a superior measurement device, since many people do not consciously know what influences their opinions and decisions.43
Accordingly, Zaltman uses photos, visual depiction, and metaphor in his research to try to better understand the relationship between the consumer and the product or advertisement at issue. This approach may be worthy of consideration within the forensic profession. We are, to a degree, in the advertising business. Our message is usually some variant of “Fraud is a betrayal of trust, it hurts other people, it has negative consequences for you, we will find out about it—Don’t do it.” This is well and good, but do we know how fraud is perceived by the subconscious mind of an employee? Do we know how our antifraud message is perceived? Are we even doing it right? Perhaps neuroscience can help.
Game Theory
Another potential avenue of inquiry is suggested by the book A Beautiful Mind, by Sylvia Nasar, which spawned the popular and Academy Award-winning movie of the same name. These works deal with the life and work of Nobel Laureate and mathematician John Nash, who spent much of his academic and research careers in the field of game theory. The RAND Corporation was, for many years, involved with the U.S. government, especially the U.S. Air Force, in attempting to apply game theory to issues of military strategy and nuclear deterrence. Nash, for several years, was deeply involved in those projects.44 At the risk of gross oversimplification, game theory is an attempt to understand human behavior, under certain assumptions, when something is at stake.
Hal R. Varian, writing in The New York Times, provides some context for the development of the field research leading up to Nash’s work. He notes that the eminent mathematician, John von Neumann, laid much of the ground work for modern game theory as he sought to understand the basic logic behind strategic interactions. Later, teaming with economist Oscar Morgenstern, von Neumann began to develop mathematic formulations that could represent these situations in which two or more parties or players had opposing interests. Such scenarios, often referred to as “zero-sum” games could be fanciful in nature, such as sporting events or forms of gambling. Their name derives from the simple proposition that for one player to “win,” every other player must “lose.” They could also, however, be deadly earnest, like wars and international economic disputes. The point was not so much the size of the stakes involved as it was to attempt to understand and mathematically represent the logic brought to bear in such exchanges.45
Authors Hillier and Lieberman, in their book, Introduction to Operations Research, offer a somewhat more generic description of the field, when they note:
Previous << 1 .. 90 91 92 93 94 95 < 96 > 97 98 99 100 101 102 .. 147 >> Next