Auditor efficiency and effectiveness with diagrammatic and linguistic conceptual model representations

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 223-248

  Dunn, Cheryl L ^a   Gerard, Gregory J ^a  

^a FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Conceptual model; Diagrammatic representation; Linguistic representation; User performance

Indexed keywords

EID: 0042333484     PISSN: 14670895     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1467-0895(01)00022-7     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Agarwal R, Sinha AP, Tanniru M Cognitive fit in requirements modeling: a study of object and process methodologies. J Manage Inf Syst. 13(2):1996;137-162.
2. Amer TS Entity-relationship and relational database modeling representations for the audit review of accounting applications: an experimental examination of effectiveness. J Inf Syst. 7(1):1993;1-15.
3. Batini C, Ceri S, Navathe SB Conceptual database design: an entity relationship approach. 1992;Benjamin/Cummings, Redwood City, CA.
4. Batra D, Antony SR Effects of data model and task characteristics on designer performance: a laboratory study. Int J Hum-Comput Stud. 41(4):1994;481-508.
5. Batra D, Hoffer JA, Bostrom RP Comparing representations with relational and EER models. Commun ACM. 33(2):1990;126-139.
6. Chan HC, Wei KK, Siau KL User-database interface: the effect of abstraction levels on query performance. MIS Q. 17(4):1993;441-464.
7. Chen PP The entity-relationship model - toward a unified view of data. ACM Trans Database Syst. 1(1):1976;9-36.
8. Davis FD Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3):1989;319-340.
9. Dennis AR, Carte TA Using geographical information systems for decision making: extending cognitive fit theory to map-based presentations. Inf Syst Res. 9(2):1998;194-203.
10. Dunn C, Grabski S. An investigation of localization as an element of cognitive fit in accounting model representations. Decis Sci. 32(1):2001;55-94.
11. Geerts G, McCarthy WE Database accounting systems. Williams BC, Spaul BJ IT and accounting: the impact of information technology. 1991;159-183 Chapman and Hall, New York.
12. Howe D. Free on-line dictionary of computing. Imperial College Department of Computing, University of London, 1993. http://www.foldoc.org .
13. Jih WJK, Bradbard DA, Snyder CA, Thompson NGA The effects of relational and entity-relationship data models on query performance of end users. Int J Man-Mach Stud. 31(3):1989;257-267.
14. Larkin JH, Simon HA Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognit Sci. 11:1987;65-99.
15. McCarthy WE An entity-relationship view of accounting models. Accounting Rev. 54(4):1979;667-686.
16. McCarthy WE The REA accounting model: a generalized framework for accounting systems in a shared data environment. Accounting Rev. 57(3):1982;554-578.
17. MICRA. An electronic field-marked version of: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (version published 1913 by the C&G Merriam, Springfield, MA). Plainfield, NJ: MICRA, 1998. http://www.micra.com .
18. Naur P Report on the algorithmic language ALGOL 60. Commun ACM. vol. 3:1960;299-314.
19. Nijssen GM, Halpin TA Conceptual schema and relational database design: a fact oriented approach. 1989;Prentice-Hall, New York.
20. WordNet - a lexical database for English. 1997;Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, http://wwwcogsciprincetonedu:80/cgi-bin/webwn.
21. Rob P, Coronel C Database systems: design, implementation, and management. 4th ed:2000;Course Technology, Cambridge, MA.
22. Scaife M, Rogers Y External cognition: how do graphical representations work? Int J Hum-Comput Stud. 45(2):1996;185-213.
23. Seddon P, Kiew M A partial test and development of the DeLone and McLean model of IS success. Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Information Systems; Vancouver, British Columbia:1994;99-110.
24. Seddon P, Yip S-K An empirical evaluation of user information satisfaction (UIS) measures for use with general ledger accounting software. J Inf Syst. 6(1):1992;75-92.
25. Sinha AP, Vessey I Cognitive fit: an empirical study of recursion and iteration. IEEE Trans Software Eng. 18(5):1992;368-379.
26. Sinha AP, Vessey I An empirical investigation of entity-based and object-oriented data modeling. Proceedings of the Twentieth International Conference on Information Systems Charlotte, NC:1999;229-244.
27. Smelcer JB, Carmel E The effectiveness of different representations for managerial problem solving: comparing tables and maps. Decis Sci. 28(2):1997;391-420.
28. Umanath N, Vessey I Multiattribute data presentation and human judgment: a cognitive fit perspective. Decis Sci. 25(5-6):1994;795-824.
29. Vessey I Cognitive fit: a theory-based analysis of the graph versus tables literature. Decis Sci. 22(2):1991;219-240.
30. Vessey I The effect of information presentation on decision making: a cost-benefit analysis. Inf Manage. 27(2):1994;103-119.
31. Vessey I, Conger SA Requirements specification: learning object, process, and data methodologies. Commun ACM. 37(5):1994;102-113.
32. Vessey I, Galetta D Cognitive fit: an empirical study of information acquisition. Inf Syst Res. 2(1):1991;63-84.