JRSSEM 2022, Vol. 01, No. 12, 2109 – 2119

E-ISSN: 2807 - 6311, P-ISSN: 2807 - 6494

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i12.224 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

THE EFFECT OF PROFESSIONAL Skepticism,

INVESTIGATIVE AUDITOR'S EXPERIENCE AND

WHISTLEBLOWING SYSTEM ON AUDITOR'S ABILITY IN

DETECTING FRAUD

Monica Pamela Citranagari*

Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia

e-mail: monicapamelactanagari@gmail.com

*Correspondence: monicapamelactanagari@gmail.com

Submitted: 27 June 2022, Revised: 04 July 2022, Accepted: 15 July 2022

Abstract. There is a difference between fraud causing system errors and financial statement errors.

References to various national and international cases show that fraud can happen anywhere. This

study aims to determine the effect of professional skepticism, auditor experience, and

whistleblowing system on the auditor's ability to detect fraud. The population in this study were all

private internal and external auditors (Public Accounting Firms). Data collection techniques in this

study using a questionnaire. This type of research is a hypothesis testing research. The number of

samples collected is 56 respondents. The sampling technique used is convenience sampling. The

results of this study indicate that: 1) Professional Skepticism has a positive effect on the auditor's

ability to detect fraud. 2) The experience of the investigative auditor has a positive effect on the

auditor's ability to detect fraud. 3) The whistleblowing system has a positive effect on the auditor's

ability to detect fraud.

Keywords: skepticism; experience of investigative auditing; whistleblowing

Monica Pamela Citranagari | 2110

INTRODUCTION

System Errors and fraud have

differences that lead to errors in a

financial statement (Svabova et al.,

2020). Referring to various cases both at

home and abroad, it shows that fraud

can occur anywhere (Alissa et al., 2014).

The rise of the phenomenon of

providing Unqualified Audit Opinions

(WTP) does not guarantee that an

institution is free from fraud. This is

reinforced by the fact that until

December 2018 there were ten Regional

Governments that received Unqualified

Opinions, but their regional heads

committed corruption. In addition to the

scope of government, private

companies and state-owned enterprises

also received many unqualified

opinions, but after that it was revealed

that there were cases of fraud involving

the top brass of the state-owned

company. One of the cases is the

provision of Unqualified Audit Opinions

to PT Sunprima Nusantara Pemfundan

(SNP Finance) and PT Garuda Indonesia

for the 2018 financial statements.

Fraud or fraud is increasingly

happening in various ways that continue

to develop so that the auditor's ability to

detect fraud needs to continue.

improved. Currently, the limitations of

the auditor will cause a gap for users of

auditor services who hope that the

auditor can provide assurance that the

financial statements presented do not

contain misstatements. Many factors are

thought to be the cause of the auditor's

inability to detect fraud both internally

(within the auditor) and externally

(Ulimsyah, 2021). Revealed that one of

the causes of auditors in detecting fraud

is the low level of professional

skepticism owned by auditors. Auditors

with high skepticism will increase the

ability to detect fraud by developing

additional information searches when

faced with symptoms of fraud.

Profit mark-up, manipulation of

financial statement records, and

document omission are frauds that are

often carried out that can harm the

country's finances and economy

(Mamahit & Urumsah, 2018). This is for

the benefit of individuals and groups of

people. According to the results of the

Indonesian fraud survey (2016), internal

audit and media reports are the most

effective media for detecting fraud. The

reporting media in question is a system

that makes the public dare to report

fraud or what is known as the

whistleblowing system. Whistleblowing

is under the supervision of the audit

committee and reports through this

system will be followed up by internal

audit (Abdullah et al., 2018). Thus, in

recent times there have been many

incidents of fraud cases which were

finally uncovered thanks to the active

role of auditors who carried out

investigations and were assisted by the

existence of a whistleblowing system.

For this reason, efforts to prevent

and eradicate fraud need to be

improved and intensified. The

government's way of handling and

uncovering fraud that occurs, one of

which is by enforcing the law,

2111 | The Effect of Professional Skepticism, Investigative Auditor's Experience and

Whistleblowing System on Auditor's Ability in Detecting Fraud

conducting investigative audits and

implementing forensic audits in their

examinations as well as the public's

concern for reporting on the

whistleblowing system is also very

effective in revealing corruption and

fraud that occurred. Whistleblowing

system is an application to report

violations, which can support the

implementation of forensic audits and

investigative audits. As for someone

who notifies the public or officials in

power about alleged dishonesty, illegal

activities or mistakes that occur in

government, public or private

organizations, is called a whistleblower

(Verschuuren, 2020).

Sayyid (2014) states that forensic

accounting is the use of accounting

expertise combined with investigative

abilities to make financial statements or

allegations and then an investigative

audit is defined as an effort to prove an

error in a series of relationships in a

fraud examination. Thus accounting and

investigation are a series of relationships

in fraud examination.

Based on the description above,

many researches in the field of auditing

have been carried out, highlighting the

importance of the influence of

professional skepticism and

investigative experience on audit

examinations, but some are still

inconsistent. The results of research

conducted by (Rahim et al., 2019);

(Bayuandika & Mappanyukki, 2021);

(Agustina et al., 2021) found that

professional skepticism has a positive

effect on the auditor's ability to detect

fraud, where the higher the level of

professional skepticism of the auditor,

the higher the detection effort. fraud.

As for other research conducted by

(Lubis & Pohan, 2022) at the Regional

Revenue Service of Buleleng Regency, it

shows that partially there is a significant

influence between the whistleblowing

system and the competence of human

resources on fraud p revention.

Research conducted by (Dwiyanti et al.,

2022) shows that the whistleblowing

system strengthens the influence of the

audit committee and internal audit to

uncover cases of fraud.

Attribution theory is used to

examine the perspective of the factors

that influence fraud detection (Yuniarti,

2018). KAP and agencies that have

internal audits were selected as objects

because these KAPs and agencies are

entities that provide services to detect

fraud in a company. The object of the

research is the Auditor who works at

KAP DKI Jakarta and the Company Tbk.

Through this paper, combining and

applying the attitudes possessed by

forensic auditors, combined with the

experience of auditors supported by the

existing whistleblowing system and law

enforcement, the researcher believes

that some of these things are effective

components of fraud detection. Thus

the authors are interested in the title

"The Effect of Professional Skepticism,

Whistleblowing System And Investigative

Audit Experience On Auditor Ability In

Detecting Fraud". Effect of Auditor

Professional skepticism on Auditor

Ability to Detect Fraud. Auditor

Monica Pamela Citranagari | 2112

professional skepticism is an attitude of

distrust, always questioning the audit

evidence that must be owned by the

auditor. BPK Number 1 of 2017,

mentions the skepticism of the Auditor

who believes that the responsible party

is dishonest and that the honesty of the

responsible party is no longer in

question. In accordance with this,

hypothesis 1 is as follows:

H1: Professional skepticism of forensic

auditors has a positive effect on the

ability of auditors to detect fraud.

Effect of Investigative Auditor

Experience on Auditor Ability to Detect

Fraud (Samagaio & Felício, 2022). The

results of his research prove that the

experience of the auditor has no

significant effect on the effectiveness of

implementing audit procedures to

prove fraud. Thus, this article discusses

whether the experience of the

investigative auditor has a positive

impact on the auditor's ability to detect

fraud by using fraud by the BPKP

auditor's resource person representing

the Special Region of Yogyakarta. Based

on this description, hypothesis 2 is made

as follows: H2: Investigating the auditor's

experience has a positive impact on the

auditor's ability to detect fraud.

The effect of the Whistleblowing

system on the auditor's ability to detect

fraud. (Mamahit & Urumsah, 2018) state

that whistleblowing can affect fraud

detection, then also issue a

whistleblowing opinion in investigative

implementation that plays an important

role but not in fraud detection planning.

So what is obtained by the existence of

a whistleblowing system that is

implemented is proven to be effective in

supporting fraud detection. This

description means that the

whistleblowing system and fraud

detection have a positive relationship.

Based on the description above, the

hypothesis is as follows:

H3: Whistleblowing has a positive effect

on the Auditor's Ability to Detect Fraud.

METHODS

This type of research is a

quantitative research with a Hypothesis

Testing model. The population in this

study are internal and private auditors

(KAP). The research sample consisted of

56 samples consisting of 17 internal

auditors and 39 auditors from public

accounting firms. Data was collected

using a questionnaire method which

was distributed to respondents

according to the sampling target

described previously. The analysis

technique in this research consists of

descriptive analysis and statistical

analysis. Both of these techniques are

used to get optimal results. This

research uses simple regression analysis

and Moderated Regression Analysis

(MRA) to see the interaction effect of

Professional Skepticism, Investigative

Audit Experience and Whistleblowing

System. Population is a generalized area,

consisting of objects with certain

qualities and characteristics, which are

determined by researchers to study and

draw conclusions (Dźwigoł, 2019). The

population of this study are auditors

2113 | The Effect of Professional Skepticism, Investigative Auditor's Experience and

Whistleblowing System on Auditor's Ability in Detecting Fraud

who work in KAP and companies in the

DKI Jakarta area, totaling 59 auditors.

Sampling used multivariate analysis

involving Roscoe's (1975) perspective

with minimal data using the formula for

the number of variables used and using

multivariate regression analysis in the

test.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Investigative Audit Experience

Professional skepticism is the

attitude of the auditor who does not

easily believe in the audit evidence

provided by the client, so that in

carrying out his duties the auditor

always questions and critically evaluates

the audit evidence provided. To measure

Professional Skepticism using a Likert

scale.

Whistleblowing System

Moderating Variables in this

Research Whistleblowing System where

the author will test the use of

Whistleblowing system data by auditors

in the examination process. This

moderating variable is measured using

a Likert scale. The data collected in this

study were processed using the

Statistical Package for Social Science

(SPSS) version 25 program assisted by

multiple regression analysis, first testing

the classical hypothesis before analysis.

Normality Test

This research was conducted with

the aim of testing whether the

regression model of the confounding or

residual variables had a normal

distribution. As it is known that the F test

and t test assume that the residual value

follows a normal distribution. Basically

the normality test is a comparison

between empirical data and theoretical

data and the category is a type of

appropriate test (Goodnes Of Fit) in

(Khadivi, 2018).

Hypothesis Testing

In this study the researchers chose

two variables, namely 3 independent

variables and one dependent variable.

The analytical method used to test the

hypothesis is the multiple regression

method, which is the regression used to

determine how much influence the

independent variable has on the

dependent variable used to test Ha1,

Ha2, and Ha3, with an interaction

approach that aims to meet research

expectations. regarding the Effect of

Professional Skepticism, Whistleblowing

System and Investigative Audit

Experience on Auditor Ability to Detect

Fraud. The regression equation is as

follows:

The regression equation can be

explained

Y=α+β1X1+ 2X2+ 3X3 + e

Y = Auditor's Ability to Detect Fraud

= Constants

1, 2, 3 = Regression coefficient

X1 = Auditor Professional Skepticism

X2 = Experience Investigative Auditor

X3 = Whistle-Blowing System

e -= error

To prove the truth of the hypothesis

test, statistical tests are used on the

Monica Pamela Citranagari | 2114

output produced by the multiple

regression model, statistical tests

include:

a. Coefficient of Determination

Test The coefficient of

determination test (R2) aims to

determine how much is the ability of

the independent variable to explain

the dependent variable. In the SPSS

output, the coefficient of

determination is located in the

Model Summaryb table and is

written as Adjusted R Square. The

value of R2 is 1, meaning that the

fluctuations in the dependent

variable can be fully explained by the

independent variable and there are

no other factors that cause

fluctuations in the dependent

variable. If the value of R2 ranges

from 0 to 1, it means that the

stronger the ability of the

independent variable can explain

fluctuations in the dependent

variable (Ghozali: 2011).

b. Partial Regression Test (t test)

The t test was conducted to

determine the effect of each

independent variable individually on

the dependent variable. The results

of this t-test on the SPSS output can

be seen in the Coefficientsα table. To

determine whether there is an

influence of each independent

variable individually on the

dependent variable, it is done by

comparing the p-value in the Sig

column, each independent variable

with a significance level of 0.05 used.

If the p-value is less than 0.05 then

Ha is accepted and Ho is

rejected.0.05, then Ha is rejected

and Ho

This test is used as a test of the

assumption of normality of the data.

The results of normality testing

using the test in this study can be

seen in the table below.

Table 1. NPar Tests One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized

Residual

Normal Parameters

a,b,

Mean

25,1267606

Std.

,26539868

Deviation

Most Extreme

Absolute

,050

Differences

Positive

,050

Negative

-,045

Test Statistic

,050

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

,200

c, d

2115 | The Effect of Professional Skepticism, Investigative Auditor's Experience and

Whistleblowing System on Auditor's Ability in Detecting Fraud

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

Hypothesis Test

a. Results Determination Coefficient Test Results (R2)

Table 2. Determination Coefficient Test Results (R2)

Model Summary

Model

R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of

the Estimate

Durbin-

Watson

,708

501,475

3,29805

1,388

1) Predictors: (Constant),

X3,X2,X1

2) Dependent Varible: Y

The results of the model output

in Table 4.18 show that the adjusted

value of R2 (coefficient of

determination) adjusted) is 0.475.

This shows that the 47.5% change in

the auditor's ability to detect fraud

can be explained by three

independent variables, namely,

auditor professional skepticism,

investigative auditor experience,

and whistleblowing system.

b. Results of t test (Partial Test)

Table 2. T test (Parisal test)

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

Model

Std. Error

Beta

Sig.

(Constant)

14,148

3,644

5,529

,001

Professional

,380

,182

-.262

2,442

,014

Investigative

Audit

Experience

-,138

,393

-.133

-2,339

.849

Whistleblowi

ng System

,008

,106

,011

2,078

,059

a. Dependent Variable: Y auditor's ability to detect fraud

Monica Pamela Citranagari | 2116

DOI : 10.36418/jrssem.v1i12.224 https://jrssem.publikasiindonesia.id/index.php/jrssem/index

Effect of auditor's professional

skepticism on auditor's ability to detect

fraud

The results of the first hypothesis test

(H1) show that auditor's professional

skepticism has a positive influence on

auditor's ability to detect fraud, the result is

professional skepticism -0.380 and t 2.442,

the value significant at the 0.05 level of

significance thus professional skepticism

has a positive and significant effect on the

auditor's ability to detect has been

supported.

The first hypothesis (H1) states that the

professional skepticism of forensic auditors

has a positive effect on the auditor's ability

to detect fraud. The results obtained from

the statistical tests performed showed a

coefficient of 0.380 with p 0.014.

Interpreting skepticism has an influence on

the auditor's ability to detect fraud at KAP

or companies in Jakarta.

We can understand that to disclose

fraud detection, it must be supported by a

high attitude of professional skepticism, so

that the implementation of fraud detection

will be more effective. To improve the

implementation of fraud detection, this is

to increase professional skepticism in the

implementation of fraud detection

detection.

The results of this test are in

accordance with the attribution theory,

namely the internal factors that a person

has will determine the person's behavior,

which states that the attitude of the auditor

affects the quality of the audit conducted

by Prwait and Glover 2014. This study

contradicts the results of stating that the

auditor's responsibility is not influenced by

the attitude of skepticism in detecting

fraud. by Sanjaya, 2017.

The Effect of Investigative Auditor

Experience on Auditor Ability to detect

fraud.

The result of the second hypothesis

(H2) which states that the investigative

auditor's experience has an influence on

the auditor's ability to detect fraud.

However, when viewed on the test results,

the regression experience value of the

investigation is 0.138, t is -2.339 and p-

value is 0.056. This shows that the

investigative auditor experience variable

(X2) has no effect on the auditor's ability to

detect fraud. Thus the experience of

investigating the auditor variable will not

affect the auditor's ability to detect fraud at

an important level of 5%, otherwise H2 will

not be supported.

The second hypothesis (H2) which

states that investigative auditor experience

has a positive effect on the auditor's ability

to detect fraud, it turns out that

investigative experience is -2,339 with a p

value of 0.56. This means that the

investigative auditor's experience has no

effect on the auditor's ability to detect

fraud at KAP and companies in Jakarta.

These results may occur because the

low level of experience of the investigative

auditor has little effect on the auditor's

ability to uncover fraud detection or other

factors due to the ability to detect fraud as

well.

The results of this study are in line with

research conducted by Supriyono (2014)

and Pramitasari (2017) which shows that

auditor experience will not affect the

2117 | The Effect of Professional Skepticism, Investigative Auditor's Experience and

Whistleblowing System on Auditor's Ability in Detecting Fraud

auditor's ability to detect fraud. This study

contradicts the findings of Yuniati (2015)

and Arsendy (2017) that audit experience

has a positive influence on the auditor's

ability to detect fraudulent behavior on the

quality of audit evidence.

The effect of the whistleblowing system

on the auditor's ability to detect fraud

Testing the third hypothesis (H3) which

states that the whistleblowing system has a

positive effect on the auditor's ability to

detect fraud. It is stated that the reporting

system (X3) is 0.008 and t is 2.078. The value

of this regression coefficient was

significantly supported at the 0.05 level of

significance and the p-value of 0.002. It can

be interpreted that the whistleblowing

system variable has a positive and

significant effect on the auditor's ability to

detect fraud at a significance level of 5% or

H3 is supported.

The third hypothesis (H3) which states

that the whistleblowing system has a

positive effect on the auditor's ability to

detect fraud. The whistleblowing system

coefficient value shows a value of 0.008

with a p value of 0.002. It can be proven

that the reporting system has a significant

positive effect on the ability of the auditors

of KAP and companies in Jakarta in

detecting fraud. In order to carry out

reliable audit disclosures, it must be

supported by an accurate and reliable

whistleblowing system, so that

whistleblowers can easily use it without fear

in reporting a fraud that occurs in the

surrounding environment.

The test results according to the

attribution theory, the whistleblowing

system is said to be an external factor

because it is used as a tool or support in

providing assessments such as detecting

fraud. So that it can assist auditors in

detecting fraud at KAP and companies in

Jakarta.

The results of this study support

research conducted by Nugroho (2015)

showing that the whistleblowing system

has an influence on fraud prevention and

research conducted by Utami et.al (2019)

shows that the whistleblowing system

strengthens the influence of the audit

committee and internal audit to uncover

cases of fraud. However, contrary to

another study conducted by Pratama.et, al

(2019). The results show that the reporting

system has no effect on the auditor's ability

to detect fraud.

CONCLUSIONS

This research was conducted to

determine the effect of professional

skepticism of forensic auditors, experience

of investigative auditors, and

whistleblowing system on the auditor's

ability to detect fraud.

Based on the results of the research that

has been done, it can be concluded that: 1)

Professional skepticism of forensic auditors

has a significant positive effect on the

ability of auditors to detect fraud, so the

higher the level of auditor skepticism, the

more fraud detection results will be

revealed. 2) The experience of the

investigative auditor has no effect on the

auditor's ability to detect fraud. 3) The

whistleblowing system has a significant

positive effect on the auditor's ability to

detect fraud, which means that the

existence of a whistleblowing system is a

Monica Pamela Citranagari                                                                                      | 2118 
means  for  whistleblowers  to  report 
violations  that  have  occurred.  Violations 
that  occur  that  are  reported  are  an  early 
indication of fraud which will later assist the 
auditor and then follow up on the incident. 
The implementation of this whistleblowing 
system is also a tool for internal control of 
the  organization  that  can  narrow  the 
opportunities for  people who work in the 
organization  to  commit  fraud.  The  better 
the whistleblowing system is implemented, 
the more helpful the  auditor is  in making 
the search for evidence of violations faster 
in  detecting  fraud  and  reducing  losses 
arising from fraud. 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Abdullah, R., Ismail, Z., & Smith, M. (2018). 
Audit committees’ involvement and the 
effects  of  quality  in  the  internal  audit 
function  on  corporate  governance. 
International  Journal  of  Auditing,  2(3), 
385–403. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111
/ijau.12124 
 
Agustina,  F.,  Nurkholis,  N.,  &  Rusydi,  M. 
(2021).  Auditors’  professional 
skepticism  and  fraud  detection. 
International  Journal  of  Research  in 
Business  and  Social  Science  (2147-
4478),  4(10),  275–287. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2052
5/ijrbs.v10i4.1214 
 
Alissa, W., Capkun, V., Jeanjean, T., & Suca, 
N. (2014). An empirical investigation of 
the  impact  of  audit  and  auditor 
characteristics on auditor performance. 
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 
3(7),  495–510. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.aos.2014.06.003 
Bayuandika, M., & Mappanyukki, R. (2021). 
The effect  of  spiritual  intelligence  and 
professional  skepticism  of  internal 
auditors  on  detection  of  fraud. 
International  Journal  of  Asian  Social 
Science,  2(11),  22–29. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1848
8/journal.1.2021.111.22.29 
 
Dwiyanti, D. A., Wicaksono, A. P. N., & Ulum, 
I.  (2022).  Internal  Control  System, 
Whistleblowing System, Organizational 
Commitment  And  Fraud  Prevention: 
Individual  Morality  As  A  Moderating 
Variable.  Jurnal  Akuntansi,  9(2). 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3065
6/jak.v9i2.4577 
 
Dźwigoł, H. (2019). Research methods and 
techniques in new management trends: 
research results. Virtual Economics, 2(1), 
31–48. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3402
1/ve.2019.02.01(2) 
 
Khadivi,  A.  (2018).  Phenotypic 
characterization  of  Elaeagnus 
angustifolia using multivariate analysis. 
Industrial  Crops  and  Products,  2(11), 
155–161. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.indcrop.2018.04.050 
 
Lubis, I. T., & Pohan, A. R. (2022). Analysis 
Of  Factors  Affecting  The  Quality  Of 
Development Of Regional Income And 
Expenditure  Budgets,  Deli  Serdang 
Regency.  Enrichment:  Journal  of 
Management,  2(2),  2391–2397. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3533
5/enrichment.v12i2.569 
 
Mamahit, A. I., & Urumsah, D. (2018). The 
Comprehensive  Model  of  Whistle-
Blowing,  Forensic  Audit,  Audit 
Investigation,  and  Fraud  Detection. 
Journal  of  Accounting  and  Strategic 
Finance,  1(2),  153–162. 

2119  |  The  Effect  of  Professional  Skepticism,  Investigative  Auditor's  Experience  and 
Whistleblowing System on Auditor's Ability in Detecting Fraud 
 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3300
5/jasf.v1i2.43 
 
Rahim,  S.,  Muslim,  M., &  Amin,  A.  (2019). 
Red  Flag  And  Auditor  Experience 
Toward  Criminal  Detection  Trough 
Profesional  Skepticism.  Jurnal 
Akuntansi,  2(3),  47–62. 
https://doi.org/ttps://doi.org/10.24912
/ja.v23i1.459 
 
Samagaio,  A.,  &  Felício,  T.  (2022).  The 
influence of the auditor’s personality in 
audit  quality.  Journal  of  Business 
Research,  4(11),  794–807. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.jbusres.2021.11.082 
 
Svabova,  L.,  Kramarova,  K.,  Chutka,  J.,  & 
Strakova, L. (2020). Detecting earnings 
manipulation  and  fraudulent  financial 
reporting  in  Slovakia.  Oeconomia 
Copernicana,  2(3),  485–508. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2413
6/oc.2020.020 
 
Ulimsyah,  U.  (2021).  Whistleblowing’s 
effectiveness  in  preventing  fraud 
through forensic audit and investigative 
audit.  Point  of  View  Research 
Accounting  and  Auditing,  2(1),  81–91. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4709
0/povraa.v2i1.116 
 
Verschuuren,  P.  (2020).  Whistleblowing 
determinants  and  the  effectiveness  of 
reporting channels in the international 
sports  sector.  Sport  Management 
Review,  2(3),  142–154. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016
/j.smr.2019.07.002 
 
 
© 2022 by the authors. Submitted  
for possible open access publication  
under  the  terms  and  conditions  of  the  Creative 
Commons  Attribution  (CC  BY  SA)  license 
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/). 
 