Search

Fraud, means to mislead others in order to gain some advantage. Errors are mistakes made due to forgetfulness, ignorance and carelessness. The main difference between the two concepts is whether there is an element of intent. Transactions with an element of intent are called fraud, while transactions without an element of intent are called errors. The aim of this study is to determine the awareness of accounting professionals operating in the province of Elazig about the concepts of error and fraud in accounting. For this purpose, the survey method was applied by interviewing 80 accounting professionals operating in the province of Elazig. The obtained data were tested with various statistical methods. It has been concluded that the most important external factor that directs the members of the profession to error and fraud is the taxpayers, and the errors and frauds are mostly caused by the work intensity in the enterprise. It has been determined that the perceptions of the members of the profession regarding error and fraud judgments in accounting in terms of marital status and experience do not differ significantly. However, a statistically significant difference was found between the gender members of the profession and the errors and frauds arising from the lack of technological knowledge. In this case, it was concluded that the technological knowledge of male members of the profession is better. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of the study is to determine the argumentation levels of prospective science and social studies teachers and errors in their arguments. For this purpose, the study was conducted with descriptive research method. The participants of the study consisted of 80 prospective teachers. The data were collected through a scenario involving dilemmas of environmental pollution. The data were analyzed by using Argumentation Assessment Rubric. The prospective teachers' errors in making the argument were examined under four components of the argument (claim, data, warrant and rebuttal). According to the results some of the prospective teachers did not produce any arguments; It was concluded that some of them used grounds, claim and warrants but they did not use rebuttal. The majority of prospective teachers used rebuttal in addition to other components. Therefore, it has been determined that the majority of prospective teachers produced high level arguments. Furthermore, it was found that the pre-service teachers made mistakes regarding the use of the warrant, data, claim, and rebuttal. Suggestions were made in line with the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]