The Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act (EADA) database and the USA Today NCAA athletics department finance database are two of the most commonly used databases for scholars, policy makers, and other constituents interested in studying the economics of college athletics. Many in the higher education community, however, question the validity of these databases. This study used Benford’s Law of First Digits as a tool for spotting irregularities in EADA and USA Today college athletics financial data. After reviewing 5 years of data, the findings show that while there was some slight deviation from Benford’s Law, EADA and USA Today data largely conformed to the expectations of Benford’s Law.
BrownR. W.JewellR. T. (2006). The marginal revenue product of a women’s college basketball player. Industrial Relations, 45, 96–101. doi:10.1111/j.1468-232X.2006.00415.x
4.
CheslockJ. J.AndersonD. (2005). Lessons from research on Title IX and intercollegiate athletics. In SimonR. (Ed.), Sporting equality: Title IX thirty years later (pp. 127–146). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
5.
CheslockJ. J.KnightD. B. (2015). Diverging revenues, cascading expenditures, and ensuing subsidies: The unbalanced and growing financial strain of intercollegiate athletics on universities and their students. The Journal of Higher Education, 86, 417–447. doi:10.1080/00221546.2015.11777370
6.
ChoW. K. T.GainesB. J. (2007). Breaking the (Benford) law: Statistical fraud detection in campaign finance. The American Statistician, 61, 218–223. doi:10.1198/000313007X223496
7.
CollinsJ. C. (2017). Using excel and Benford’s law to detect fraud: Learn the formulas, functions, and techniques that enable efficient Benford analysis of data sets. Journal of Accountancy, 223, 44–50.
8.
CrocettiE.RandiG. (2016). Using the Benford’s law as a first step to assess the quality of the cancer registry data. Frontiers in Public Health, 4, 225. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2016.00225
9.
DiekmannA. (2007). Not the first digit! Using Benford’s law to detect fraudulent scientific data. Journal of Applied Statistics, 34, 321–329. doi:10.1080/02664760601004940
10.
DurtschiC.HillisonW.PaciniC. (2004). The effective use of Benford’s law to assist in detecting fraud in accounting data. Journal of Forensic Accounting, 5, 17–34.
11.
Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act, H.R.921, 103rd Congress. (1994).
12.
FewsterR. M. (2009). A simple explanation of Benford’s law. The American Statistician, 63, 26–32.
JonesW. A. (2013). Exploring the relationship between intercollegiate athletic expenditures and team on-field success among NCAA Division I institutions. Journal of Sports Economics, 14, 584–605. doi:10.1177/1527002511433469
17.
JonesW. A. (2015). High-level football and appropriations to universities: Are sports-crazed representatives responsive to NCAA divisional affiliation?Journal of Education Finance, 40, 438–455.
18.
JudgeG.SchechterL. (2009). Detecting problems in survey data using Benford’s law. Journal of Human Resources, 44, 1–24. doi:10.3368/jhr.44.1.1
19.
KossovskyA. E. (2014). Benford’s law: Theory, the general law of relative quantities, and forensic fraud detection applications. Toh Tuck Link, Singapore: World Scientific.
20.
LeemisL. M.SchmeiserB. W.EvansD. L. (2000). Survival distributions satisfying Benford’s law. The American Statistician, 54, 236–241.
21.
MehtaA.BhavaniG. (2017). Application of forensic tools to detect fraud: The case of Toshiba. Journal of Forensic and Investigative Accounting, 9, 692–710.
NewcombS. (1881). Note on the frequency of use of the different digits in natural numbers. American Journal of Mathematics, 4, 39–40. doi:10.2307/2369148
24.
NigriniM. J. (1999). I’ve got your number. Journal of Accountancy, 187, 79–83.
25.
NigriniM. J.MittermaierL. J. (1997). The use of Benford’s law as an aid in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 16, 52–67.
26.
RauchB.GöttscheM.BrählerG.EngelS. (2011). Fact and fiction in EU-governmental economic data. German Economic Review, 12, 243–255. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0475.2011.00542.x
27.
ShiJ.AusloosM.ZhuT. (2018). Benford’s law first significant digit and distribution distances for testing the reliability of financial reports in developing countries. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 492, 878–888. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2017.11.017
28.
SlijepčevićS.BlaškovićB. (2014). Statistical detection of fraud in the reporting of Croatian public companies. Financial Theory and Practice, 38, 81–96. doi:10.3326/fintp.38.1.4
29.
SuggsW. (2009). Old challenges and new opportunities for studying the financial aspects of intercollegiate athletics. New Directions for Higher Education, 148, 11–22.
30.
TatosT. (2018). An empirical evaluation of EADA and NCAA college sports financial data: Applications for research and litigation. Marquette Sports Law Review, 29, 411–450.
31.
TödterK. H. (2009). Benford’s law as an indicator of fraud in economics. German Economic Review, 10, 339–351. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0475.2009.00475.x
VarianH. R. (1972). Benfords law. American Statistician, 26, 65–66.
34.
WilliamsD. P. (2016). Ticking and tying at the buzzer: An analysis of the NCAA agreed-upon procedures for reporting financial data. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics, 9, 185–207.
