External auditors' reliance on work performed by internal auditors: The influence of fee pressure on this reliance decision

Auditing

Volumn 18, Issue SUPPL., 1999, Pages 102-135

  Gramling, Audrey A ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Audit planning; Auditor independence; Fee pressure; Internal audit; Partner preferences; Time budgets

Indexed keywords

EID: 0040886508     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abdel-khalik, A. R., D. Snowball, and J. H. Wragge. 1983. The effects of certain internal audit variables on the planning of the external audit. The Accounting Review (April): 215-227.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), The Commission on Auditors' Responsibilities. 1978. Report, Conclusions, Recommendations. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 1997. AICPA Professional Standards. Chicago, IL: CCH Incorporated.
4. Anderson, B. H., and M. J. Maletta. 1999. Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor belief-revision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 75-89.
5. Arens, A. A., and J. K. Loebbecke. 1997. Auditing: An Integrated Approach. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
6. Asare, S. K., and W. R. Knechel. 1995. Termination of information evaluation in auditing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 1: 21-31.
7. Ashton, R., and A. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review (October): 623-641.
8. Bierstaker, J. L., and A. Wright. 1999. The effects of fee pressure and partner pressure on audit planning decisions. Working paper, University of Massachusetts Boston.
9. Brown, P. R. 1983. Independent auditor judgment in the evaluation of internal audit functions. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 444-455.
10. Clark, M., T. E. Gibbs, and R. B. Schroeder. 1980. Evaluating internal audit departments under SAS No. 9. The Woman CPA (July): 8-11, 22.
11. _, _, and _. 1981. CPAs judge internal audit department objectivity. Management Accounting (February): 40-43.
12. Cohen, J., and G. Trompeter. 1998. An examination of factors affecting audit practice development. Contemporary Accounting Research (Winter): 481-504.
13. Courtemanche, G. 1986. The New Internal Auditing. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
14. Cushing, B. E., and S. S. Ahlawat. 1996. Mitigation of recency bias in audit judgment: The effect of documentation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 15 (Fall): 110-122.
15. Dirsmith, M. W., and M. A. Covaleski. 1985. Informal communications, nonformal communications and mentoring in public accounting firms. Accounting, Organizations and Society 10 (2): 149-169.
16. Dopuch, N. 1992. Another perspective on the use of deception in auditing experiments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 11 (Fall): 108-112.
17. Elgin, P. 1992. Huge liability judgments pressure CPAs to raise price. Corporate Cashflow (July): 12-13.
18. Elliott, R. K. 1994. Confronting the future: Choices for the attest function. Accounting Horizons 8 (September): 106-124.
19. Emby, R., and M. Gibbins. 1988. Good judgment in public accounting: Quality and justification. Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring): 287-313.
20. Felix, W. L., Jr., A. A. Gramling, and M. J. Maletta. 1998. Coordinating Total Audit Coverage: The Relationship Between Internal and External Auditors. Altamonte Springs, FL: Institute of Internal Auditors' Research Foundation.
21. _, _, and _. 1999. The contribution of internal audit as a determinant of external audit fees and factors influencing this contribution. Working paper. University of Arizona.
22. Fonorow, M. S. 1989. Internal Auditor's Manual and Guide: The Practitioner's Guide to Internal Auditing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23. Gibbins, M. 1992. Deception: A tricky issue for behavioral research in accounting and auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 11 (Fall): 113-128.
24. _, and J. D. Newton. 1994. An empirical exploration of complex accountability in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (Autumn): 165-186.
25. Hackenbrack, K., and M. W. Nelson. 1996. Auditors' incentives and their application of financial accounting standards. The Accounting Review 71 (January): 43-59.
26. Hogarth, R. M., and H. J. Einhorn. 1992. Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24: 1-55.
27. Houston, R. 1999. The effects of fee pressure and client risk on audit seniors' time budget decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 70-86.
28. Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA). 1995. Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. Altamonte Springs, FL: IIA.
29. Kennedy, J. 1993. Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 231-245.
30. Koonce, L., U. Anderson, and G. Marchant. 1994. Justification of decisions in auditing. Journal of Accounting Research (33): 369-384.
31. Kreutzfeldt, R. 1992. Discussant's response to "Auditors judgments/decisions under time pressure: An illustration and agenda for research." Proceedings of the 1992 Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, 92-98. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
32. Maletta, M. J. 1993. An examination of auditors' decisions to use internal auditors as assistants: The effect of inherent risk. Contemporary Accounting Research (9): 509-525.
33. _, and T. Kida. 1993. The effect of risk factors on auditors' configural information processing. The Accounting Review 68: 681-691.
34. Margheim, L. L. 1986. Further evidence on external auditors' reliance on internal auditors. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 194-205.
35. _, and W. Label. 1990. External auditor reliance on internal auditors when audit risk is high: Some empirical findings. Advances in Accounting: 293-311.
36. McNair, C. J. 1991. Proper compromises: The management control dilemma in public accounting and its impact on auditor behavior. Accounting, Organization, and Society 16: 635-653.
37. Messier, W. F., Jr., and A. Schneider. 1988. A hierarchical approach to the external auditor's evaluation of the internal auditing function. Contemporary Accounting Research: 337-353.
38. _, and W. C. Quilliam. 1992. The effect of accountability on judgment: Development of hypotheses for auditing. Auditing: Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 123-138.
39. _, and R. M. Tubbs. 1994. Recency effects in belief revision: The impact of audit experience and the review process. Auditing: Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (Spring): 57-72.
40. Peecher, M. E. 1996. The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 34 (Spring): 125-140.
41. Prawitt, D. F. 1995. Staffing assignments for judgment-oriented audit tasks: The effects of structured audit technology and environment. The Accounting Review (July): 443-465.
42. Public Oversight Board (POB). 1993. In the Public Interest. (March 5). Stamford, CT: POB.
43. _. 1994. Strengthening the Professionalism of the Independent Auditor. (September 13). Stamford, CT: POB.
44. 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.
45. Schiff, J. B. 1990. New Directions in Internal Auditing. New York, NY: The Conference Board.
46. Schneider, A. 1984. Modeling external auditors' evaluations of internal auditing. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 657-678.
47. _. 1985. The reliance of external auditors on the internal audit function. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 911-919.
48. Solomon, I., and C. Brown. 1992. Auditors'judgments and decisions under time pressure: An illustration and agenda for research. Proceedings of the 1992 Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, 73-91. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
49. Stevens, M. 1985. The Accounting Wars. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
50. Tetlock, P. E. 1983. Accountability and the complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (June): 74-83.
51. _, L. Skitka, and R. Boettger. 1989. Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: Conformity, complexity and bolstering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57: 632-640.
52. Trompeter, G. 1994. The effect of partner compensation schemes and generally accepted accounting principles on audit partner judgment. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 13 (Fall): 56-68.
53. Trotman, K. T., and A. Wright. 1996. Recency effects: Task complexity, decision mode, and task-specific experience. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 175-193.
54. Turner, C. W. 1999. Accountability demands and the auditor's evidence search strategy: The influence of reviewer preferences and the nature of the response (belief vs. action). Working paper, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
55. Whittington, R., and L. Margheim. 1992. The effects of risk, materiality, and assertion subjectivity on external auditors' reliance on internal auditors. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12 (Spring): 50-64.