I’m Not Biased. Right? 

/

When approaching any fraud investigation, it is crucial for anti-fraud professionals to remain open, to leave no stone unturned. We are taught to seek out the truth, but how do we remain unbiased? 

Theories are an important pillar of any investigation, they are what lead you to seek out more information and uncover the truth, but they are always tinged with personal biases. While eliminating biases completely is not possible, managing them is. In his session titled “The Invisible Facade: Enhancing Critical Thinking Skills to Prevent and Detect Hidden Ethical Dilemmas,” Bret Hood, CFE, director of 21st Century Learning & Consulting LLC, shared with attendees of the 36th Annual ACFE Global Fraud Conference the importance of not allowing your biases to cloud your judgement. 

Hood began the session by asking attendees to share what they believe their job is, stressing that the job of a fraud examiner is to uncover the truth, not to illicit a confession. “The Innocence Project specifically dedicates themselves to trying to free people that were wrongfully convicted... and I would be willing to bet that almost 99.9% of investigators did not intend for an innocent person to go to jail,” he added. 

When You Think You Are Immune, You Are Most Susceptible 

Biases can present in a multitude of ways, while most typically think of racial, cultural and even socio-economic differences affecting biases, Hood also identified other ways they can appear in investigations. 

Confirmation Bias: The tendency to seek out information that supports your held belief. 

Framing Bias: A cognitive bias in which people decide between options based on whether the options are presented with positive or negative connotations. 

Ethical Fading: When people neglect the ethical implications of a decision because they are focused on the other elements of the choice in front of them. 

Motivated Blindness: The human tendency to overlook information that works against what people want to believe, either because the belief itself is in their self-interest or because they have held the belief a long time and are emotionally invested in retaining it. 

Knowing You Are Not Immune, And Combatting It 

After recognizing and accepting that biases are inescapable, but manageable, Hood recommended a few different structured approaches to help navigate past them. 

The Toulim Model: 

Hood described this as a model that helps you construct and evaluate arguments. 

  • Claim – What is the claim? 

  • Data – What reasons or evidence support the claim? 

  • Warrant – What connects the claim to the evidence? 

  • Backing – Support to back up the warrant. 

  • Qualifier – Provide counter arguments to test the claim. 

  • Rebuttal – What limits to claim/warrant could disprove it? 

The Facione Method: 

Hood explained that this method offers a comprehensive and holistic perspective on the potential situation. 

  • Interpretation – Categorization of the issue. 

  • Analysis – Examining ideas for avenues of investigation. 

  • Evaluation – Assessing the information available. 

  • Interference – Drawing conclusions based on the information. 

  • Explanation – Studying results. 

  • Self-Regulations – Self-examination of potential biases that could have influenced the investigation. 

Paul-Elder Model: 

Hood highlighted this as a philosophical and ethical thinking model. 

  • Intellectual standards – Clarity, depth, logic, accuracy, significance and relevance.  

  • Elements of thought – Consider influence, interpretation, assumption, point of view and more. 

  • Intellectual traits – Humility, empathy, perseverance and more. 

To close his session, Hood reminded fraud examiners in the audience that, “Critical thinking is essential. If you get different perspectives, you are aware of the motivated blindness, ethical fading and then you’re better prepared.”