Final answer:
Strategic reasoning is the ability to anticipate a fraud perpetrator's likely method of concealing fraud, involving an understanding of adversaries' behaviors to formulate predictions.
Step-by-step explanation:
The ability to anticipate a fraud perpetrator's likely method of concealing a fraud refers to strategic reasoning. This type of reasoning involves understanding and predicting an adversary's behavior and planning accordingly. When comparing the reasoning types provided, deductive reasoning begins with a general theory and, after considering observed information, reaches a specific conclusion. In contrast, inductive reasoning starts with specific observations and moves towards a broader generalization. Abductive reasoning, also called 'inference to the best explanation', starts with an observation or set of observations and then seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation.In the context of fraud assessment, strategic reasoning may incorporate elements of inductive or abductive reasoning to anticipate fraudulent activities. For example, based on past fraud cases (specific instances), an investigator may generalize that certain financial anomalies could indicate fraud (general conclusion) or suggest the most likely form of fraud that explains the anomalies observed.