Accountability, the dilution effect, and conservatism in auditors' fraud judgments

Journal of Accounting Research

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 227-237

  Hoffman, Vicky B ^a   Patton, James M ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031529851     PISSN: 00218456     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2491362     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 53: The Auditor's Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities. New York: AICPA, 1988.
2. _. Exposure Draft of a Proposed Statement on Auditing Standards: Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. New York: AICPA, May 1996.
3. ASHTON, R. "Pressure and Performance in Accounting Decision Settings: Paradoxical Effects of Incentives, Feedback, and Justification." Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement 1990): 148-80.
4. BELL, T. B.; S. SZYKOWNY; AND J. J. WILLINGHAM. "Assessing the Likelihood of Fraudulent Financial Reporting: A Cascaded Logit Approach." Working paper, KPMG Peat Marwick, 1993.
5. BUCHMAN, T. A.; P E. TETLOCK; AND R. O. REED. "Accountability and Auditors' Judgments about Contingent Events." Working paper, University of Colorado, 1994.
6. ELLIOTT, B., AND P. JACOBSON. "The Basic Elements of Accountability and Attestation." Working paper, KPMG Peat Marwick, 1993.
7. EMBY, C., AND M. GIBBINS. "Good Judgment in Public Accounting: Quality and Justification." Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring 1988): 287-313.
8. GIBBINS, M., AND C. EMBY. "Evidence on the Nature of Professional Judgment in Public Accounting." In Auditing Research Symposium 1984, edited by A. R. Abdel-khalik and I. Solomon, pp. 181-212. Champaign, III.: Office of Accounting Research, University of Illinois, 1985.
9. GLOVER, S. "The Influence of Time Pressure and Accountability on Auditors' Processing of Nondiagnostic Information." Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn 1997): 213-26.
10. HACKENBRACK, K. "Implications of Seemingly Irrelevant Audit Evidence in Audit Judgment." Journal of Accounting Research (Spring 1992): 126-36.
11. HEIMAN-HOFFMAN, V. B.; K. P. MORGAN; AND J. M. PATTON. "The Warning Signs of Fraudulent Financial Reporting." Journal of Accountancy (October 1996): 75-77.
12. HIRST, D. E. "Discussion of the Effects of Accountability on Judgment: Development of Hypotheses for Auditing." Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (Supplement 1992): 139-51.
13. JOHNSON, V. E., AND S. E. KAPLAN. "Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Accountability on Auditors' Judgments." Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (Supplement 1991): 96-107.
14. KENNEDY, J. "Debiasing Audit Judgment with Accountability: A Framework and Experimental Results." Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn 1993): 231-45.
15. _. "Debiasing the Curse of Knowledge in Audit Judgment." The Accounting Review (April 1995): 249-73.
16. KOONCE, L.; U. ANDERSON; AND G. MARCHANT. "Justification of Decisions in Auditing." Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn 1995): 369-84.
17. LIBBY, R., AND K. T. TROTMAN. "The Review Process as a Control for Differential Recall of Evidence in Auditor Judgments." Accounting, Organizations, and Society (1993): 559-74.
18. LORD, A. T. "Pressure: A Methodological Consideration for Behavioral Research in Auditing." Auditing: A Journai of Practice and Theory (Fall 1992): 90-108.
19. MESSIER, W. F., JR., AND W. C. QUILLIAM. "The Effect of Accountability on Judgment: Development of Hypotheses for Auditing." Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (Supplement 1992): 123-51.
20. MORTON, J. E., AND W. L. FELIX. "Assessing Control Risk: Effects of Procedural Differences on Auditor Consensus." In Auditing Symposium X: Proceedings of the 1991 Deloitte & TouchelUniversity of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, edited by R. P. Srivastava, pp. 109-31. Lawrence: School of Business, University of Kansas, 1991.
21. NISBETT, R. E.; H. ZUKIER; AND R. E. LUMLEY. "The Dilution Effect: Nondiagnostic Information Weakens the Implications of Diagnostic Information." Cognitive Psychology 13 (1981): 248-77.
22. PEECHER, M. E. "The Influence of Auditors' Justification Processes on Their Decisions: A Cognitive Model and Experimental Evidence." Journal of Accounting Research (Spring 1996): 125-40.
23. QUILLIAM, W. C. "Examining the Effects of Accountability on Auditors' Valuation Decisions." Working paper, University of South Florida, 1993.
24. SHELTON, S. W. "The Effect of Experience and Accountability on the Use of Nondiagnostic Evidence in Auditor Judgment." Working paper, DePaul University, 1996.
25. SIMONSON, I., AND P. NYE. "The Effect of Accountability on Susceptibility to Decision Errors." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (April 1992): 416-46.
26. SMITH, J. F., AND T. KIDA. "Heuristics and Biases: Expertise and Task Realism in Auditing." Psychological Bulletin (May 1991): 472-89.
27. TETLOCK, P. E. "Accountability: The Neglected Social Context of Judgment and Choice." In Research in Organizational Behavior, edited by B. M. Staw and L. Cummings, pp. 297-332. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press, 1985.
28. TETLOCK, P. E., AND R. BOETTGER. "Accountability: A Social Magnifier of the Dilution Effect." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (September 1989): 388-98.