Article2016

Do Sentiments Matter in Fraud Detection? Estimating Semantic Orientation of Annual Reports

82 citations0/0 files storedIntelligent systems in accounting, finance and management/Intelligent systems in accounting, finance & management

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining Benford’s Law and Fraud Detection

Abstract

Summary We present a novel approach for analysing the qualitative content of annual reports. Using natural language processing techniques we determine if sentiment expressed in the text matters in fraud detection. We focus on the Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) section of annual reports because of the nonfactual content present in this section, unlike other components of the annual reports. We measure the sentiment expressed in the text on the dimensions of polarity, subjectivity, and intensity and investigate in depth whether truthful and fraudulent MD&As differ in terms of sentiment polarity, sentiment subjectivity and sentiment intensity. Our results show that fraudulent MD&As on average contain three times more positive sentiment and four times more negative sentiment compared with truthful MD&As. This suggests that use of both positive and negative sentiment is more pronounced in fraudulent MD&As. We further find that, compared with truthful MD&As, fraudulent MD&As contain a greater proportion of subjective content than objective content. This suggests that the use of subjectivity clues such as presence of too many adjectives and adverbs could be an indicator of fraud. Clear cases of fraud show a higher intensity of sentiment exhibited by more use of adverbs in the “adverb modifying adjective” pattern. Based on the results of this study, frequent use of intensifiers, particularly in this pattern, could be another indicator of fraud. Moreover, the dimensions of subjectivity and intensity help in accurately classifying borderline examples of MD&As (that are equal in sentiment polarity) into fraudulent and truthful categories. When taken together, these findings suggest that fraudulent MD&As in contrast to truthful MD&As contain higher sentiment content. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 82 citations exist upstream.

References

2011When Is a Liability Not a Liability? Textual Analysis, Dictionaries, and 10‐Ks 2007Giving Content to Investor Sentiment: The Role of Media in the Stock Market 2004Is All That Talk Just Noise? The Information Content of Internet Stock Message Boards 2011Predicting Material Accounting Misstatements*2003Lying Words: Predicting Deception from Linguistic Styles 2012Sentiment During Recessions 2012Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology 1982Felt, false, and miserable smiles

Cited by

2022Attentive statement fraud detection: Distinguishing multimodal financial data with fine-grained attention 2023Textual analysis and detection of financial fraud: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms 2020MINING RISK-RELATED SENTIMENT IN CORPORATE ANNUAL REPORTS AND ITS EFFECT ON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE 2020Big data tools for Islamic financial analysis 2023NLP Sentiment Analysis and Accounting Transparency: A New Era of Financial Record Keeping 2022

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.