Detecting Problems in Military Expenditure Data Using Digital Analysis

References

• Beber, B., and A. Scacco. 2012. “What the numbers say: A digit-based test for election fraud political analysis.” Political analysis 20 (2): 211–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benford, F. 1938. “The law of anomalous numbers.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 78 (4): 551–572.
   Google Scholar
• Carslaw, C. 1988. “Anomalies in income numbers: Evidence of goal oriented behaviour.” The Accounting Review 63 (2): 321–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cho, W., and B. Gaines. 2007. “Breaking the (Benford) law: Statistical fraud detection in campaign finance.” The American Statistician 61 (3): 218–223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Ceuster, M., G. Dhaene, and T. Schatteman. 1998. “On the hypothesis of psychological barriers in stock markets and Benford’s Law.” Journal of Empirical Finance 5 (3): 263–279.
   Google Scholar
• Deckert, J., M. Myagkov, and P. Ordeshook. 2011. “Benford’s law and the detection of election fraud.” Political Analysis 19 (3): 245–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diekmann, A. 2007. “Not the first digit! Using Benford’s law to detect fraudulent scientific data.” Journal of Applied Statistics 34 (3): 321–329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diekmann, A., and B. Jann. 2010. “Benford’s law and fraud detection: facts and legends.” German Economic Review 11 (3): 397–401.
   Google Scholar
• Durtschi, C., W. Hillison, and C. Pacini. 2004. “The effective use of Benford’s law to assist in detecting fraud in accounting data.” Journal of Forensic Accounting 5 (1): 17–34.
   Google Scholar
• Dye, K. M. 2007. “Corruption and fraud detection by public sector auditors EDPACS: The EDP Audit.” Control, and Security Newsletter 35 (5–6): 6–15.
   Google Scholar
• Easton, M. E. 2010. “DoD’s financial audit strategy: The way ahead.” Armed Forces Comptroller 55 (1): 12–15.
   Google Scholar
• Giles, D. 2007. “Benford’s law and naturally occurring prices in certain ebaY auctions.” Applied Economics Letters 14 (3): 157–161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzales-Garcia, J. and Pastor, G. (2009) Benford’s Law and Macroeconomic Data Quality. International Monetary Fund, Working Paper. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1356437
   Google Scholar
• Government Accountability Office ([GAO] 2012, March) DOD Financial Management: The Army Faces Significant Challenges in Achieving Audit Readiness for Its Military Pay, GAO Report to Congressional Committees. Washington D.C.
   Google Scholar
• Guan, L., D. He, and D. Yang. 2006. “Auditing, integral approach to quarterly reporting, and cosmetic earnings management.” Managerial Auditing Journal 21 (6): 569–581.
   Google Scholar
• Günnel, S., and K.-H. Tödter. 2009. “Does Benford’s law hold in economic research and forecasting?” Empirica 36 (3): 273–292.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, T. 1995. “A statistical derivation of the significant-digit law.” Statistical Science 10 (4): 354–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Judge, G., and L. Schechter. 2009. “Detecting problems in survey data using Benford’s law.” The Journal of Human Resources 44 (1): 1–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kinnunen, J., and M. Koskela. 2003. “Who is miss world in cosmetic earnings management? A cross-national comparison of small upward rounding of net income numbers among eighteen countries.” Journal of International Accounting Research 2 (1): 39–68.
   Google Scholar
• Knubel, J. 2010. “The department of defense financial audit journey.” Armed Forces Comptroller 55 (1): 8–11.
   Google Scholar
• Krämer, W. 2011. “The cult of statistical significance: What economists should and should not do to make their data talk.” Schmollers Jahrbuch 131 (3): 455–468.
   Google Scholar
• Leemis, L., B. Schmeiser, and D. Evans. 2000. “Survival distributions satisfying Benford’s law.” The American Statistician 54 (4): 236–241.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ley, E. 1996. “On the peculiar distribution of the U.S. stock indexes’ digits.” The American Statistician 50 (4): 311–313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ley, E., and H. Varian. 1994. “Are there psychological barriers in the Dow-Jones index?” Applied Financial Economics 4 (3): 217–224.
   Google Scholar
• Matthews, W. (2006) Shadow budget: Why Congress complains about, but won't end, supplemental appropriations. Armed Forces Journal http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/04/1813765 (accessed 13 September 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Mebane, W. 2008. “Election forensics: The second-digit Benford’s law test and recent American presidential elections.” In Election Fraud: Detecting and Deterring Electoral Manipulation, edited by R. Alvarez, T. Hall and S. Hyde, 161–181. Washington, DC: Brookings Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mebane, W. 2010. “Fraud in the 2009 presidential election in Iran?” Chance 23 (1): 6–15.
   Google Scholar
• Mebane, W. (2011) Comment on “Benford’s law and the detection of election fraud”. Political Analysis 19(3), 269–272.
   Google Scholar
• Möller, M. (2009) Measuring the Quality of Auditing Services with the Help of Benford’s Law: An Empirical Analysis and Discussion of this Methodical Approach http://ssrn.com/abstract=1529307
   Google Scholar
• National Audit Office (NAO 2011a, March) A Guide to the NAO’s International Work, http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011/international_guide.aspx (accessed 09 October 2012).
   Google Scholar
• National Audit Office (NAO 2011b, September) A Summary of the NAO’s Work on the Ministry of Defence 2010–11, http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1012/departmental_overview_mod.aspx (accessed 10October 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Newcomb, S. 1881. “Note on the frequency of use of the different digits in natural numbers.” American Journal of Mathematics 4 (1): 39–40.
   Google Scholar
• Nigrini, M. 1996. “A taxpayer compliance application of Benford’s Law: tests and statistics for auditors.” The Journal of the American Taxation Association 18 (1): 72–91.
   Google Scholar
• Nigrini, M. 2005. “An assessment of the change in the incidence of earnings management around the Enron-Andersen episode.” Review of Accounting and Finance 4 (1): 92–110.
   Google Scholar
• Nigrini, M. 2011. Forensic Analytics. New Jersey, NJ: Hoboken.
   Google Scholar
• Nigrini, M., and L. Mittermaier. 1997. “The use of Benford’s law as an aid in analytical procedures auditing.” A Journal of Practice & Theory 16 (2): 52–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niskanen, J., and M. Keloharju. 2000. “Earnings cosmetics in a tax-driven accounting environment: Evidence from Finnish public firms.” The European Accounting Review 9 (3): 443–452.
   Google Scholar
• Nye, J. and Moul, C. (2007) The political economy of numbers: On the application of Benford’s law to international macroeconomic statistics. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics 7(1). Article 17, 1–12
   Google Scholar
• Pinkham, R. 1961. “On the distribution of first significant digits.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32 (4): 1223–1230.
   Google Scholar
• Raimi, R. 1976. “The first digit problem.” The American Mathematical Monthly 83 (7): 521–538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rauch, B., M. Göttsche, G. Brähler, and S. Engel. 2011. “Fact and fiction in EU-governmental economic data.” German Economic Review 12 (3): 243–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, R. 2004. “Reducing false alarms in the detection of human influence on data.” Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance 19 (2): 141–158.
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer, C., J.-P. Schräpler, K.-R. Müller, and G. Wagner. 2005. “Automatic identification of faked and fraudulent interviews in the German SOEP.” Schmollers Jahrbuch 125 (1): 183–193.
   Google Scholar
• Skousen, C., L. Guan, and T. Wetzel. 2004. “Anomalies and unusual patterns in reported earnings: Japanese managers round earnings.” Journal of International Financial Management and Accounting 15 (3): 212–234.
   Google Scholar
• Sylvester, R. K. 2004. “Military equipment valuation to achieve a clean audit: Who cares?” Defence for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics 1 (6): 24–29.
   Google Scholar
• Sylvester, R. K. 2006. “An insider’s guide to military equipment audits in Fiscal year 2006 and beyond.” Defence for Acquisition Technology and Logistics 3 (5): 12–15.
   Google Scholar
• Themnér, L. and Wallensteen, P. (2011) Armed conflict, 1946–2010. Journal of Peace Research 48(4): 525–536.
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. 1989. “Unusual patterns in reported earnings.” The Accounting Review 64 (4): 773–787.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiefer, C. 2007. “The Iraq debacle: the rise and fall of procurement-aided unilateralism as a paradigm of foreign war.” University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 29 (1): 1–56.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tödter, K.-H. 2009. “Benford’s law as an indicator of fraud in economics.” German Economic Review 10 (3): 339–351.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2010), Occasional Papers No. 20 Promoting Further Openness and Transparency in Military Matters, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs. 2011a. Transparency in Armaments. New York, NY: United Nations Standardized Instrument for Reporting Military Expenditures Guidelines.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2011b). Objective Information on Military Matters: Transparency of Military Expenditures. New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2012a), Military Spending, http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Milex/, New York (accessed 14 April 2012).
   Google Scholar
• United Nations Office for Disarmament Affairs (2012b), Instrument for Reporting Military Expenditures, http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/Milex/Forms/ (accessed 14 April 2012).
   Google Scholar
• Van Caneghem, T. 2002. “Earnings management induced by cognitive reference points.” British Accounting Review 34 (2): 167–178.
   Google Scholar
• Van Caneghem, T. 2004. “The impact of audit quality on earnings rounding-up behaviour: Some UK evidence.” European Accounting Review 13 (4): 771–786.
   Google Scholar
• Watrin, C., R. Struffert, and R. Ullmann. 2008. “Benford’s law: An instrument for selecting tax audit targets?” Review of Managerial Science 2 (3): 219–237.
   Google Scholar