Decision processes in audit evidential planning: A multistage investigation

Auditing

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 122-143

  Wright, Arnold M ^a   Bedard, Jean C ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Analytical procedures; Audit planning; Auditing; Hypothesis generation

Indexed keywords

EID: 0041162573     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2000.19.1.123     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1983. Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 47. New York, NY: AICPA.
2. _. 1988a. Internal Control. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 55. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 1988b. Analytical Procedures. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 56. New York, NY: AICPA.
4. _. 1997. Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 82. New York, NY: AICPA.
5. Anderson, J., S. Kaplan, and P. Reckers. 1992. The effects of output interference on analytical procedures judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 1-13.
6. Asare S., A. Wright, and S. Wright. 1998. Utilizing analytical procedures as substantive evidence: The impact of a client explanation on hypothesis testing. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research 1: 13-32.
7. Bedard, J. C., and S. Biggs. 1991. Pattern recognition, hypotheses generation, and auditor performance in an analytical task. The Accounting Review 66 (3): 622-642.
8. _, and A. Wright. 1994. The functionality of decision heuristics: Reliance on prior audit adjustments in evidential planning. Behavioral Research in Accounting (Supplement): 62-89.
9. _, S. Biggs, and J. DiPietro. 1998. Analytical procedures hypotheses, management representations and audit planning decisions. Advances in Accounting: 49-73.
10. Bédard, J., and M. Chi. 1993. Expertise in professional auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 21-45.
11. Bierstaker J., J. Bedard, and S. Biggs. 1999. The role of problem representation shifts in auditor decision processes in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 18-36.
12. Biggs, S., T. Mock and P. Watkins. 1989. Analytical Review Procedures and Processes in Auditing. Canadian Certified General Accountant's Research Foundation Monograph No. 14. Vancouver, B.C.: Canadian Certified General Accountant's Research Foundation.
13. Bonner, S., and N. Pennington. 1991. Cognitive processes and knowledge as determinants of auditor expertise. Journal of Accounting Literature 10: 1-50.
14. Boritz, J., B. Gaber, and M. Lemon. 1987. An Experimental Study of Review of Preliminary Audit Strategy by External Auditors. Canadian Academic Accounting Association Research Monograph. Vancouver, B.C.: Canadian Certified General Accountant's Research Foundation.
15. 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: 263-276.
16. Colbert, J. 1988. Inherent risk: An investigation of auditors' judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society: 111-122.
17. Davis, J., and I. Solomon. 1989. Experience, expertise, and expert-performance research in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Literature: 150-164.
18. Dilla, W., and D. Stone. 1994. When numbers are better than words: The joint effects of response representation and experience on inherent risk judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 73-83.
19. Dunegan, K. 1993. Framing, cognitive modes and image theory: Toward an understanding of a glass half full. Journal of Applied Psychology: 491-503.
20. Elstein, A., L. Shulman, and S. Sprafka. 1978. Medical Problem Solving: An Analysis of Clinical Reasoning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Ericsson, A., and H. Simon. 1984. Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Gibbins, M., and J. Newton. 1994. An empirical exploration of complex accountability in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 165-186.
23. Gioia, D., and P. P. Poole. 1984. Scripts in organizational behavior. Academy of Management Review 9 (3): 449-459.
24. Graham, L. 1985. Audit risk - Part I. CPA Journal (August): 12-21.
25. Hirst, E., and L. Koonce. 1996. Audit analytical procedures: A field investigation. Contemporary Accounting Research (Fall): 457-486.
26. Houston, R. 1999. The effect of fee pressure and client risk on audit seniors' time budget decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 70-86.
27. Janell, P., and A. Wright. 1991. Inherent risk and control environment assessment practices of major auditing firms: The state of the art. Working paper, Northeastern University.
28. Jiambalvo, J., and W. Waller. 1984. Decomposition and assessments of audit risk. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 80-88.
29. Kaplan, S., and P. Reckers. 1989. An examination of information search during initial audit planning. Accounting, Organizations and Society 14 (5/6): 539-550.
30. Kinney, W., and W. Uecker. 1982. Mitigating the consequences of anchoring in auditor judgments. The Accounting Review 58 (January): 55-69.
31. Koonce, L. 1993. A cognitive characterization of audit analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 57-81.
32. _, U. Anderson, and G. Marchant 1995. Justification of decisions in auditing. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 369-384.
33. Libby, R. 1985. Availability and the generation of hypotheses in analytical review. Journal of Accounting Research (Fall): 648-667.
34. _, J. Artman, and J. Willingham. 1985. Process susceptibility, control risk, and audit planning. The Accounting Review (April): 212-230.
35. Maletta, M. 1993. An examination of auditors' decisions to use internal auditors as assistants: The effect of inherent risk. Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring): 508-525.
36. Mehle, T. 1982. Hypothesis generation in an automobile malfunction inference task. Acta Psychologica: 87-106.
37. Mock, T., and A. Wright. 1993. An exploratory study of auditor evidential planning judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 39-61.
38. _, and _. 1999. Are audit program plans risk-adjusted? Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Spring): 55-74.
39. O'Keefe, T., D. Simunic, and M. Stein. 1994. The production of audit services: Evidence from a major public accounting firm. Journal of Accounting Research (Autumn): 241-261.
40. O'Reilly, V., P. McDonnell, B. Winograd, J. Gerson, and H. Jaenicke. 1998. Montgomery's Auditing. Twelfth edition. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
41. Pasewark, W., and J. Strawser. 1992. An investigation of auditor judgments on the effect of preliminary analytical procedures on the extent of substantive testing. Accounting and Finance: 271-284.
42. Peecher, M. 1996. The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 125-140.
43. Rich, J., I. Solomon, and K. Trotman. 1997. The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society (July): 481-505.
44. Shiffrin, R., and W. Schneider. 1977a. Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review 84 (January): 1-60.
45. _, and _. 1977b. Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review 84 (March): 127-190.
46. Srivastava, R., and G. Shafer. 1992. Belief-function formulas for audit risk. The Accounting Review (April): 249-283.
47. _, T. Mock, and A. Wright. 1998. Audit program planning using a belief function framework. Proceedings of the University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems XII Proceedings. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas.
48. Wofford, J., and V. Goodwin. 1990. Effects of feedback on cognitive processing and choice of decision style. Journal of Applied Psychology: 603-612.
49. Wright, A. 1988. The impact of prior working papers on evidential planning judgments. Accounting Organizations and Society: 595-606.
50. _, and S. Wright. 1997. The effect of industry experience on hypothesis generation and audit planning decisions. Behavioral Research in Accounting: 273-294.
51. Zimbelman, M. 1997. The effects of SAS No. 82 on auditors' attention to fraud risk factors and audit planning decisions. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 75-97.