ACCOUNTING BEHAVIOR

MOCHAMMAD SALMAN AL FARISI (C1I016026)

EMIR SURYA (C1I017004)
 ABSTRACT
The aim of this study is to better understand why public officials
and business employees engage in corrup- tion. Insight into
individual-level explanations for corrup- tion was obtained with
the aid of a self-report survey.
 INTRODUCTION
The most widely used indicator of the level of a country’s public
sector corruption is the Corruption Perceptions Index, annually
published by the nongovernmental orga- nization Transparency
International. According to this index, the public sector of the
Netherlands is one of the least corrupt countries.
 Defining and Conceptualizing Corruption

This is a rather broad definition that includes a wide array of

unethical and criminal acts, such as conflicts of interest, forgery,
and embezzlement. To make progress in the explanation of
corruption, according to Collins et al.
 METHOD
Procedure and Respondense
Questionnaire

Worked at Public Sector Worked at Private Sector

(202) (200)

• Managemet Position 31% 21%

• Frequency of professional
• public–private interactions:
- Monthly 18%
- Weekly 40% 60%
- Daily 42% 39%
 METHOD
Measure

Two versions of the questionnaire were developed, one for the private sector, the active
side of corrupt transactions in this study, and one for the public sector, the passive side.
Both versions were kept as similar as possible.
METHOD
Variable
 METHOD
Analysis

To estimate the degree of relationship between corruptionproneness and the

proposed motives, point-biserial correlation coefficients were calculated, which is
the value of Pearson’s product moment correlation when one of the variables is
dichotomous and the other variables are measured on a ratio or interval scale
(Kornbrot 2005). Next, binary logistic regression analyses were performed to test
which of the proposed motives explained respondents’ proneness to corruption,
and whether the effects of the motives depended upon the respondents’ sector
and side in the corrupt transactions.
Result
Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to examine which of the
motives were best able to explain
corruption-proneness. Three models were tested: the first consists of background
factors, the second adds motives, and the third subsequently adds social
desirability bias. The first model consisted of the background factors gender, age,
and education level and the sector respondents were employed in. As shown in
Table 2, of the background factors only gender explained respondents’ proneness
to corruption; females were less prone to corruption than males.
 Discussion

This study aimed at gaining better understanding of why, at

an individual level, business employees and public officials
engage in corrupt transactions. The findings show that all
proposed motives were related to self-reports of corruption
proneness.