The effects of source integrity and consistency of evidence on auditors' judgments

Auditing

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 14-16

  Goodwin, Jenny ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Audit judgment; Evidence consistency; Source integrity

Indexed keywords

EID: 0039622964     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.1999.18.2.1     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Abdel-khalik, A. R., D. Snowball, and J. H. Wragge. 1983. The effects of certain internal audit variables on the planning of external audit programs. The Accounting Review (April): 215-227.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1995. AICPA Professional Standards Volume 1: U.S. Auditing Standards. New York, NY: Commerce Clearing House, Inc.
3. Anderson U., and G. Marchant. 1989. The auditor's assessment of the competence and integrity of auditee personnel. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 8 (Supplement): 1-16.
4. Asare, S. 1992. The auditor's going concern opinion decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review (April): 379-393.
5. Ashton, A., and R. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review (October): 623-641.
6. Bamber, E. M. 1983. Expert judgment in the audit team: A source reliability approach. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 396-412.
7. Bentham, J. 1827. Rationale of Judicial Evidence. London, U.K.: Hunt and Clarke.
8. Bernardi, R. A. 1994. Fraud detection: The effect of client integrity and competence and auditor cognitive style. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (Supplement): 68-84.
9. Birnbaum, M. H., and S. E. Stegner. 1979. Source credibility in social judgment: Bias, expertise and the judge's point of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (1): 48-74.
10. Brown, P. R. 1983. Independent auditor judgment in the evaluation of internal audit functions. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 444-455.
11. Caster, P., and K. V. Pincus. 1996. An empirical test of Bentham's theory of the persuasiveness of evidence. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15 (Supplement): 1-22.
12. Dutta, S. K., and R. P. Srivastava. 1993. Aggregation of evidence in auditing: A likelihood perspective. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12 (Supplement): 137-160.
13. Edge, W. R., and A. A. Farley. 1991. External auditor evaluation of the internal audit function. Accounting and Finance (May): 69-83.
14. Goodwin, J., and K. T. Trotman. 1996. Factors affecting the audit of revalued non-current assets: Initial public offerings and source reliability. Accounting and Finance (November): 151-170.
15. Harkins, S. G., and R. E. Petty. 1981a. Effects of source magnification of cognitive effort on attitudes: An information-processing view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40: 401-413.
16. _, and _. 1981b. The multiple source effect in persuasion: The effects of distraction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 7: 627-635.
17. _, and _. 1987. Information utility and the multiple source effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52: 260-268.
18. Hirst, D. E.. 1994. Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 113-126.
19. International Federation of Accountants (IFA). 1994. International statement on auditing ISA 500 Audit Evidence. New York, NY: IFAC.
20. Joyce, E. J., and G. C. Biddle. 1981. Are auditors judgments sufficiently regressive? Journal of Accounting Research 4 (Autumn): 323-349.
21. Kaplan, S. E., and P. M. J. Reckers. 1984. An empirical examination of auditors' initial planning processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 4 (Fall): 1-19.
22. Keppel, G. 1991. Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. Third edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23. Kissinger, J. N. 1977. A general theory of evidence as the conceptual foundation in auditing theory: Some comments and extension. The Accounting Review (April): 322-339.
24. Lin, W. T., T. J. Mock, and A. Wright. 1984. The use of the analytic hierarchy process as an aid in planning the nature and extent of audit procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 4 (Fall): 89-99.
25. Margheim, L. L. 1986. Further evidence on external auditors' reliance on internal auditors. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 194-205.
26. Mautz, R. K., and H. A. Sharaf. 1961. The Philosophy of Auditing. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
27. Messier, W. F., Jr. 1992. The sequencing of audit evidence: Its impact on the extent of audit testing and report formulation. Accounting and Business Research (Spring): 143-150.
28. _, and A. Schneider. 1988. A hierarchical approach to the external auditor's evaluation of the internal auditing function. Contemporary Accounting Research 4 (2): 337-353.
29. _, and R. M. Tubbs. 1994. Recency effects in belief revision: The impact of audit experience and the review process. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 57-72.
30. Moore, D. J., and R. Reardon. 1987. Source magnification: The role of multiple sources in the processing of advertising appeals. Journal of Marketing Research 24: 412-417.
31. Ohanian, R. 1991. The impact of celebrity spokespersons' perceived image on consumers' intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research 31 (1): 46-54.
32. O'Keefe, D. J. 1990. Persuasion Theory and Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
33. Peecher, M. E. 1996. The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 125-140.
34. Pei, B. K. W., S. A. Reed, and B. S. Koch. 1992. Auditor belief revisions in a performance auditing setting: An application of the belief-adjustment model. Accounting, Organizations and Society 17 (2): 169-183.
35. Perloff, R. M. 1993. The Dynamics of Persuasion. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
36. Petty R. E., and J. T. Cacioppo. 1981. Attitudes and Persuasion: Classic and Contemporary Approaches. Dubuque, IA: Wm.C Brown.
37. _, and _. 1986. Communication and Persuasion: Central and Peripheral Routes to Attitude Change. New York, NY: Springer Verlag.
38. Pincus, K. V. 1994. Discussion of fraud detection: The effect of client integrity and competence and auditor cognitive style. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (Supplement): 90-96.
39. Rebele, J. E., J. A. Heintz, and G. E. Briden. 1988. Independent auditor sensitivity to evidence reliability. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 8 (Fall): 43-52.
40. Rich, J. S., I. Solomon, and K. T. Trotman. 1997. The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22 (5): 481-505.
41. Rogers, E. M., and F. F. Shoemaker. 1971. Communication of Innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press.
42. Schneider, A. 1984. Modeling external auditors' evaluations of internal auditing. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 657-678.
43. _. 1985a. The reliance of external auditors on the internal audit function. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 911-919.
44. _. 1985b. Consensus among auditors in evaluating the internal audit function. Accounting and Business Research (Autumn): 297-302.
45. Schum, D. A. 1989. Knowledge, probability and credibility. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2 (1): 39-62.
46. Srivastava, R. P. 1995a. The belief-function approach to aggregating audit evidence. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 10 (3): 329-356.
47. _. 1995b. A general scheme for aggregating evidence in auditing: Propagation of beliefs in networks. In Artificial Intelligence in Accounting and Auditing, 3, edited by M. A. Vasahelyi, 55-99. Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers.
48. _. 1996. Discussion of an empirical test of Bentham's theory of the persuasiveness of evidence. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15 (Supplement): 23-32.
49. Toba, Y. 1975. A general theory of evidence as the conceptual foundation in auditing theory. The Accounting Review (January): 7-24.
50. Tubbs, R., W. Messier, and R. Knechel. 1990. Recency effects in the auditor's belief-revision process. The Accounting Review (April): 452-460.