Mitigation of Recency Bias in Audit Judgment: The Effect of Documentation

Auditing

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 1996, Pages

  Cushing, Barry E ^a   Ahlawat, Sunita S ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Audit judgment; Going concern judgments; Order effects; Recency effects

Indexed keywords

EID: 1542572630     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. 1982. Working papers. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 41. New York: AICPA.
2. _. 1988. The auditor's consideration of an entity's ability to continue as a going concern. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 59. New York: AICPA.
3. Anderson, U., and W. F. Wright. 1988. Expertise and the explanation effect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 42 (October): 250-269.
4. Arnold, V., and S. G. Sutton. 1995. Order and recency effects in complex decision making: Implications for the design of audit-oriented IDSS. Working paper, University of Hartford.
5. Asare, S. K. 1992. The auditor's going-concern decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review 67 (April): 379-393.
6. Ashton, A. H., and R. H. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review 63 (October): 623-641.
7. Butt, J. L., and T. L. Campbell. 1989. The effects of information order and hypothesis-testing strategies on auditors' judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society 14 (5/6): 471-479.
8. Christ, M. Y. 1993. Evidence on the nature of audit planning problem representations: An examination of auditor free recalls. The Accounting Review 68 (April): 304-322.
9. Church, B. K. 1991. An examination of the effect that commitment to a hypothesis has on auditors' evaluations of confirming and disconfirming evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research 7 (Spring): 513-534.
10. Felix, W. L., Jr., and W. R. Kinney, Jr. 1982. Research in the auditor's opinion formulation process: State of the art. The Accounting Review 57 (April): 245-271.
11. Gibbins, M. 1984. Propositions about the psychology of professional judgment in public accounting. Journal of Accounting Research 22 (Spring): 103-125.
12. Hanno, D. M., and T. Kida. 1996. The effect of decision consequences on the data attended to in judgment processes. Working paper, University of Massachusetts.
13. Hogarth, R. M., and H. J. Einhorn. 1992. Order effects in belief updating: The belief adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24 (January): 1-55.
14. Joyce, E. J., and G. C. Biddle. 1981. Anchoring and adjustment in probabilistic inference in auditing. Journal of Accounting Research 19 (Spring): 120-145.
15. Kennedy, J. 1993. Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research 31 (Autumn): 231-245.
16. Libby, R., J. T. Artman, and J. J. Willingham. 1985. Process susceptibility, control risk, and audit planning. The Accounting Review 60 (April): 212-230.
17. Mayer, R. E. 1980. Elaboration techniques that increase the meaningfulness of technical text: An experimental test of the learning strategy hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology 72 (December): 770-784.
18. 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 22 (Spring): 143-150.
19. _, 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 13 (Spring): 57-72.
20. Smith, J. F., and T. Kida. 1991. Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. Psychological Bulletin 109 (May): 472-489.
21. Tetlock, P. E. 1983. Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psychology Quarterly 46 (December): 285-292.
22. Trotman, K., and A. Wright. 1996. Recency effects: Task complexity, decision mode, and task-specific experience. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 175-193.
23. Tubbs, R. M., W. F. Messier, Jr., and W. R. Knechel. 1990. Recency effects in the auditor's belief-revision process. The Accounting Review 65 (April): 452-460.
24. Wittrock, M. C. 1983. Writing and the teaching of reading. Language Arts 60 (May): 600-606.
25. _. 1989. Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist 24 (Fall): 345-376.