Audit judgment research - Issues addressed, research methods and future directions

Accounting and Finance

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 115-156

  Trotman, Ken T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Auditor judgments; Research methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038246059     PISSN: 08105391     EISSN: 1467629X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-629X.00007     Document Type: Article

References (133)

1. Abdel-khalik, A. R. and K. El-Shesai, 1980, Information choice and cue utilisation in an experiment on default prediction, Journal of Accounting Research 18, 325-342.
2. Abdel-khalik, A. R., D. Snowball and T. H. Wragge, 1983, The effects of certain internal audit variables on the planning of external audit programs, The Accounting Review 58, 215-227.
3. Abdolmohammadi, M. and A. Wright, 1987, An examination of the effects of experience and task complexity on audit judgments, The Accounting Review 62, 1-13.
4. Anderson, B. H. and T. Kida, 1994, Do auditors confirm beliefs provided by audit team members?, Working paper (Northeastern University, Boston).
5. Asare, S. K., 1992, The auditor's going concern opinion decision: interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence, The Accounting Review 67, 379-393.
6. Asare, S. K. and L. S. McDaniel, 1996, The effects of familiarity with the preparer and task complexity on the effectiveness of the audit review process, The Accounting Review 71, 139-159.
7. Asare, S. K. and A. Wright, 1995, Normative and substantive expertise in multiple hypotheses evaluation, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 64, 171-184.
8. Asare, S. K. and A. Wright, 1997a, Evaluation of competing hypotheses in auditing, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 16, 1-13.
9. Asare, S. K. and A. Wright, 1997b, Hypothesis revision strategies in conducting analytical procedures, Accounting, Organizations and Society 22, 737-755.
10. Ashton, R. H., 1974, An experimental study of internal control judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 12, 143-157.
11. Ashton, R. H., 1982, Human information processing in accounting, Studies in Accounting Research #17 (American Accounting Association, Florida).
12. Ashton, R. H., 1983, Research in audit decision making: Rationale, evidence and implications (The Canadian Certified General Accountants' Research Foundation, Vancouver).
13. Ashton, R. H., 1990, Pressure and performance in accounting decision settings: Paradoxical effects of incentives, feedback and justification, Journal of Accounting Research 28, 148-180.
14. Ashton, A. H. and R. H. Ashton, 1988, Sequential belief revision in auditing, The Accounting Review 63, 623-641.
15. Ashton, A. H. and R. H. Ashton, 1995, Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing (Cambridge University Press, New York).
16. Ashton, R. H. and P. R. Brown, 1980, Descriptive modeling of auditors' internal control judgments: Replication and extension, Journal of Accounting Research 18, 269-277.
17. Ashton, R. H. and S. S. Kramer, 1980, Students as surrogates in behavioral accounting research: Some evidence, Journal of Accounting Research 18, 1-15.
18. Ashton, R. H. and J. J. Willingham, 1988, Using and evaluating audit decision aids, in: R. P. Srivastava and J. E. Rebele, eds., Auditing Symposium IX: Proceedings of the 1988 Touche Ross/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems (University of Kansas) 1-25.
19. Ashton, R. H. D. Kleinmuntz, J. Sullivan and L. A. Tomassini, 1988, Audit decision making, in: A. R. Abdel-khalik and I. Solomon, eds., Research opportunities in auditing: The second decade (American Accounting Association, Florida) 95-132.
20. Bamber, E. M., 1983, Expert judgment in the audit team: A source reliability approach, Journal of Accounting Research 21, 396-412.
21. Bamber, E. M. and R. J. Ramsay 1997, An investigation of the effects of specialization in audit workpaper review, Contemporary Accounting Research 14, 501-513.
22. Bamber, E. M., R. J. Ramsay and R. M. Tubbs, 1997, An examination of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model and alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing, Accounting, Organizations and Society 22, 249-268.
23. Bamber, E. M., R. T. Watson and M. C. Hill, 1996, The effects of group support system technology on audit group decision making, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 15, 122-134.
24. Bedard, J. C. and S. F. Biggs, 1991, Pattern recognition, hypothesis generation and auditor performance in an analytical review task, The Accounting Review 66, 622-642.
25. Bell, T. B. and A. Wright, 1995, Auditing practice, research and education: A productive collaboration (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, New York).
26. Biggs, S. F. and T. J. Mock, 1983, An investigation of auditor decision processes in the evaluation of internal controls and audit scope decisions, Journal of Accounting Research 21, 234-255.
27. Biggs, S. F., T. J. Mock and P. R. Watkins, 1988, Auditors' use of analytical review in audit program design, The Accounting Review 63, 148-161.
28. Biggs, S. F., T. J. Mock and P. R. Watkins, 1989, Analytical review procedures and processes in auditing, Audit Research Monograph No. 14 (The Canadian Certified General Accountants' Research Foundation, Vancouver).
29. Biggs, S. F., A. J. Rosman and G. K. Sergenian, 1993, Methodological issues in judgment and decision-making research: Concurrent verbal protocol validity and simultaneous traces of processes, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 6, 187-206.
30. Biggs, S. F. and J. J. Wild, 1985, An investigation of auditor judgment in analytical review, The Accounting Review 60, 607-633.
31. Birnberg, J. G. and M. D. Shields, 1983, The role of attention and memory in accounting decisions, Accounting, Organizations and Society 9, 365-382.
32. Bonner, S. E., 1990, Experience effects in auditing: The role of task-specific knowledge, The Accounting Review 65, 72-92.
33. Bonner, S. E. and B. L. Lewis, 1990, Determinants of auditor expertise, Journal of Accounting Research 28, 1-20.
34. Bonner, S. E., R. Libby and M. W. Nelson, 1996, Using decision aids to improve auditors' conditional probability judgments, The Accounting Review 71, 221-240.
35. Bonner, S. E. and N. Pennington, 1991, Cognitive processes and knowledge as determinants of auditor expertise, Journal of Accounting Literature 10, 1-50.
36. Brown, C. E. and I. Solomon, 1990, Auditor configural information processing in control risk assessment, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 9, 17-38.
37. Brown, C. E. and I. Solomon, 1991, Configural data processing in auditing: The role of domain-specific knowledge, The Accounting Review 66, 1, 110-119.
38. Butt, J. and T. Campbell, 1989, The effects of information order and hypothesis-testing strategies on auditors' judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society 14, 471-479.
39. Campbell, D. T. and J. C. Stanley, 1963, Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching, in: N. L. Gage, eds., Handbook of Research on Teaching (Rand McNally, Chicago).
40. Choo, F. and I. R. C. Eggleton, 1983, An analysis of individual difference in auditors' internal control assesments, Working paper (Decision Research Centre, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand).
41. Choo, F. and K. T. Trotman, 1991, The relationship between knowledge structure and judgments for experienced and inexperienced auditors, The Accounting Review 66, 464-485.
42. Cohen, J. and T. Kida, 1989, The impact of analytical review results, internal control reliability, and experience on auditors' use of analytical review, Journal of Accounting Research 27, 263-276.
43. Colbert, J. L., 1988, Inherent risk: An investigation of auditors' judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society 13, 111-121.
44. Cushing, B. E. and S. Ahlawat, 1995, The recency effect in audit judgment: A reassessment, Working paper (University of Utah, Salt Lake, Utah).
45. Daniel, S. J., 1988, Some empirical evidence about the assessment of audit risk in practice, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 7, 174-181.
46. Davis, J. S. and I. Solomon, 1989, Experience, expertise and expert performance research in public accounting, Journal of Accounting Literature 8, 150-164.
47. Einhorn, H. J., 1976, A synthesis: Accounting and behavioral science, Journal of Accounting Research 14, 196-206.
48. Emby, C. and M. Gibbins, 1988, Good judgment in public accounting: Quality and justification, Contemporary Accounting Research 4, 287-313.
49. Felix, W. L. and W. R. Kinney, 1982, Research in the auditor's opinion formulation process: State of the art, The Accounting Review 57, 245-271.
50. Frederick, D. M., 1991, Auditors' representation and retrieval of internal control knowledge, The Accounting Review 66, 240-258.
51. Frederick, D. M., V. B. Heiman-Hoffman and R. Libby, 1994, The structure of auditors' knowledge of financial statement errors, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 13, 1-21.
52. Frederick, D. M. and R. Libby, 1986, Expertise and auditors' judgment of conjunctive events, Journal of Accounting Research 24, 270-290.
53. Gibbins, M., 1984, Propositions about the psychology of professional judgment in public accounting, Journal of Accounting Research 22, 103-125.
54. Gibbins, M. and C. Emby, 1985, Evidence on the nature of professional judgment in public accounting, Auditing Research Symposium 1984, (Office of Accounting Research, College of Commerce and Business Administration, Champagne, Illinois) 181-212.
55. Gibbins, M. and K. Jamal, 1993, Problem-centred research and knowledge-based theory in the professional accounting setting, Accounting, Organizations and Society 18, 451-466.
56. Gibbins, M. and R. J. Swieringa, 1995, Twenty years of judgment research in accounting and auditing, in: A. H. Ashton and R. H. Ashton, eds., Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing (Cambridge University Press, New York).
57. Goodwin, J. and K. T. Trotman, 1996, Factors affecting the audit of revalued noncurrent assets: Initial public offerings and source reliability, Accounting and Finance 36, 151-170.
58. Green, W. and K. T. Trotman, 1998, The impact of source and timing of inherited explanations on auditor judgment, Working paper (University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW).
59. Hackenbrack, K. and M. W. Nelson, 1996, Auditors' incentives and their application of financial accounting standards, The Accounting Review 71, 43-59.
60. Hamilton, R. E. and W. F. Wright, 1982, Internal control judgments and effects of experience: Replications and extensions, Journal of Accounting Research 20, 756-765.
61. Heiman, V., 1990, Auditors' assessments of the likelihood of error explanations in analytical review, The Accounting Review 65, 875-890.
62. Hirst, D. E., 1994, Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability, Journal of Accounting Research 32, 1, 113-126.
63. Hoffman, P. J., P. Slovic and L. G. Rorer, 1968, An analysis of variance model for the assessment of configural cue utilisation in clinical judgment, Psychological Bulletin 69, 338-349.
64. Hogarth, R. M. and H. J. Einhorn, 1992, Order effects in belief updating: The beliefadjustment model, Cognitive Psychology 24, 1-55.
65. Hunton, J. E., and R. A. McEwen, 1997, An assessment of the relation between analysts' earnings forecast accuracy, motivational incentives and cognitive information search strategy, The Accounting Review 72, 497-515.
66. Ismail, Z. and K. T. Trotman, 1995, The impact of the review process in hypothesis generation tasks, Accounting, Organizations and Society 20, 345-357.
67. Jiambalvo, J. and W. Waller, 1984, Decomposition and assessments of audit risk, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 3, 80-88.
68. Johnson, E. N., 1994, Auditor memory for audit evidence: Effects of group assistance, time delay and memory task, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 13, 36-56.
69. Joyce, E. J., 1976, Expert judgment in audit program planning, Journal of Accounting Research 14, 29-60.
70. Joyce, E. J. and G. C. Biddle, 1981a, Anchoring and adjustment in probabilistic inference in auditing, Journal of Accounting Research 19, 120-145.
71. Joyce, E. J. and G. C. Biddle, 1981b, Are auditors' judgments sufficiently regressive?, Journal of Accounting Research 19, 323-349.
72. Joyce, E. J. and R. Libby, 1982, Behavioral studies of audit decision making, Journal of Accounting Literature 1, 103-121.
73. Kachelmeier, S. J. and W. F. Messier, Jr, 1990, An investigation of the influence of a nonstatistical decision aid on auditor sample size decisions, The Accounting Review 65, 206-226.
74. Kennedy, J., 1993, Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results, Journal of Accounting Research 31, 231-245.
75. Kida, T., 1980, An investigation into auditors' continuity and related qualification judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 22, 332-340.
76. Kida, T., 1984, The impact of hypothesis testing strategies on auditors' use of judgment data, Journal of Accounting Research 22, 332-340.
77. Kinney, W. R., Jr. and W. Uecker, 1982, Mitigating the consequences of anchoring in auditor judgments, The Accounting Review 57, 55-69.
78. Koonce, L., 1992, Explanation and counter-explanation during audit analytical review, The Accounting Review 67, 59-76.
79. Koonce, L., 1993, A cognitive characterisation of audit analytical review, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 12, 57-76.
80. Libby, R., 1979, Bankers' and auditors' perceptions of the message communicated by the audit report, Journal of Accounting Research 17, 99-122.
81. Libby, R., 1981, Accounting and human information processing: Theory and applications (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).
82. Libby, R., 1983, Determinants of performance in accounting decisions, Accounting Research Convocation (The University of Alabama).
83. Libby, R., 1985, Availability and the generation of hypotheses in analytical review, Journal of Accounting Research 23, 646-665.
84. Libby, R., 1995, The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment, in: A. H.
85. Ashton, and R. H. Ashton, eds., Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing (Cambridge University Press, New York).
86. Libby, R., J. T. Artman and J. J. Willingham, 1985, Process susceptibility, control risk and audit planning, The Accounting Review 60, 212-230.
87. Libby, R. and D. M. Frederick, 1990, Experience and the ability to explain audit findings, Journal of Accounting Research 28, 348-367.
88. Libby, R. and B. L. Lewis, 1977, Human information processing research in accounting: The state of the art, Accounting, Organizations and Society 2, 245-268.
89. Libby, R. and B. L. Lewis, 1982, Human information processing research in accounting: The state of the art in 1982, Accounting, Organizations and Society 7, 231-286.
90. Libby, R. and P. A. Libby, 1989, Expert measurement and mechanical combination in control reliance decisions, The Accounting Review 64, 729-747.
91. Libby, R. and M. Lipe, 1992, Incentive effects and the cognitive processes involved in accounting judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 30, 249-273.
92. Libby, R. and J. Luft, 1993, Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: ability, knowledge, motivation and environment, Accounting, Organizations and Society 18, 425-450.
93. Libby, R. and H. Tan, 1994, Modeling the determinants of audit expertise, Accounting, Organizations and Society 19, 701-716.
94. Libby, R. and K. T. Trotman, 1993, The review process as a control for differential recall of evidence in auditor judgment, Accounting, Organizations and Society 18, 559-574.
95. Luft, J., 1995, Bonus and penalty incentives: Contract choice by employees, Journal of Accounting and Economics 18, 181-206.
96. Messier Jr, W. F., 1983, The effect of experience and firm type on materiality/disclosure judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 21, 2, 618-622.
97. Messier Jr, W. F. and R. M. Tubbs, 1994, Recency effects in belief revision: The impact of audit experience and the review process, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 13, 57-72.
98. Mock, T. J. and J. L. Turner, 1981, Internal accounting control evaluation and auditor judgment, Auditing Research Monograph No. 3, (American Institute of Certified Practising Accountants, New York).
99. Mock, T. J. and J. J. Willingham, 1983, An improved method of documenting and evaluating a system of internal accounting controls, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 2, 91-99.
100. Moeckel, C. L. and R. D. Plumlee, 1989, Auditors' confidence in accurate and inaccurate recognition of audit evidence, The Accounting Review 64, 653-666.
101. Nelson, M. W., 1993, The effects of error frequency and accounting knowledge on error diagnosis in analytical review, The Accounting Review 68, 803-824.
102. Nelson, M. W., R. Libby and S. E. Bonner, 1995, Knowledge structures and the estimation of conditional probabilities in audit planning, The Accounting Review 70, 27-47.
103. Peecher, M., 1996, The influence of auditors' justification process on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence, Journal of Accounting Research 34, 125-140.
104. Ramsay, R., 1994, Senior/Manager differences in audit workpaper review performance, Journal of Accounting Research 32, 127-135.
105. Reckers, P. M. J. and J. R. Schultz Jr, 1982, Individual versus group assisted evaluations, Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 1, 64-74.
106. Reckers, P. M. J. and J. R. Schultz Jr, 1993, The effects of fraud signals, evidence order, and group-assisted counsel on independent auditor judgment, Behavioral Research in Accounting 5, 124-144.
107. Rich, J. S., I. Solomon and K. T. Trotman, 1997a, The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective, Accounting, Organizations and Society 22, 481-505.
108. Rich, J. S., I. Solomon and K. T. Trotman, 1997b, Multi-Auditor judgment/decision making research: A decade later, Journal of Accounting Literature 16, 86-126.
109. Ricchiute, D., 1998, The effect of audit seniors' decisions on working paper documentation and on partners' decisions, Working paper (University of Notre Dame).
110. Schultz Jr, J. R. and P. M. J. Reckers, 1981, The impact of group processing on selected auditor disclosure decisions, Journal of Accounting Research 19, 482-501.
111. Simnett, R., 1996, The effect of information selection, information processing and task complexity on predictive accuracy of auditors, Accounting, Organizations and Society 21, 699-719.
112. Simnett, R. and K. T. Trotman, 1989, Auditor versus model: Information choice and information processing, The Accounting Review 64, 514-528.
113. Smith, J. F. and T. Kida, 1991, Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing, Psychological Bulletin 109, 472-489.
114. Solomon, I., 1982, Probability assessment by individual auditors and audit teams: An empirical investigation, Journal of Accounting Research 20, 689-710.
115. Solomon, I., 1987, Multi-Auditor judgment/decision making research, Journal of Accounting Literature 6, 1-25.
116. Solomon, I. and M. D. Shields, 1995, Judgment and decision research in auditing, in: A. H. Ashton, and R. H. Ashton, eds., Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing (Cambridge University Press, New York).
117. Tan, H., 1995, Effects of expectations, prior involvement and review awareness on memory for audit evidence and judgment, Journal of Accounting Research 33, 113-135.
118. Tan, H. and R. Libby, 1997, Tacit managerial versus technical knowledge as determinants of audit expertise in the field, Journal of Accounting Research 35, 97-113.
119. Trotman, K. T., 1985, The review process and the accuracy of auditor judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 23, 740-752.
120. Trotman, K. T., 1996, Research methods for judgment and decision making studies in auditing (Coopers & Lybrand and Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand: Melbourne).
121. Trotman, K. T. and J. Sng, 1989, The effect of hypothesis framing, prior expectations and cue diagnosticity on auditors' information choice, Accounting, Organizations and Society 14, 565-576.
122. Trotman, K. T. and R. Wood, 1991, A meta-analyis of studies on internal control judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 29, 180-192.
123. Trotman, K. T. and W. F. Wright, 1996, Recency effects: Task complexity, decision mode and task-specific experience, Behavioral Research in Accounting 8, 175-183.
124. Trotman, K. T. and P. W. Yetton, 1985, The effect of the review process on auditor judgments, Journal of Accounting Research 23, 256-267.
125. Trotman, K. T., P. W. Yetton and I. Zimmer, 1983, Individual and group judgments of internal control systems, Journal of Accounting Research 21, 286-292.
126. Tubbs, R. M., W. F. Messier and W. R. Knechel, 1990, Recency effects in the auditor's belief-revision process, The Accounting Review 65, 452-460.
127. Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman, 1974, Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, Science 185, 1124-1131.
128. Uecker, W. C. and W. Kinney, 1977, Judgmental evaluation of sample results: A study of the type and severity of errors made by practising CPAs, Accounting, Organizations and Society 2, 269-275.
129. Waller, W. S. and W. L. Felix, 1984, Cognition and the auditor's opinion formulation process: A schematic model of interactions between memory and current audit evidence, 27-48, in: S. Moriarity, and E. Joyce, eds., Decision making and accounting: Current research (The University of Oklahoma, Norman).
130. Weber, R., 1978, Auditor decision making on overall system reliability, accuracy, consensus and the usefulness of a simulation decision aid, Journal of Accounting Research 16, 368-388.
131. Weber, R., 1980, Some characteristics of the free recall of computer controls by EDP auditors, Journal of Accounting Research 18, 214-241.
132. Wright, A., 1988, The impact of prior working papers on auditor evidential planning judgments, Accounting, Organizations and Society 13, 595-605.
133. Wright, W. F., 1988, Audit judgment consensus and experience, in: K. R. Ferris, ed., Behavioral accounting research: A critical analysis (Century VII Publishing Company, Ohio).