The effects of source credibility on tax professional judgment in consulting engagements

Journal of the American Taxation Association

Volumn 25, Issue , 2003, Pages 33-49

  Alexander, Raquel Meyer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA WILMINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 18944378530     PISSN: 01989073     EISSN: 15588017     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/jata.2003.25.s-1.33     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Alexander, R. M. 2001. The effect of source credibility on tax professional judgment in consulting engagements. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas.
2. Anderson, U., L. Koonce, and G. Marchant. 1995. The audit review process and its effect on auditors' assessments of evidence from management. Advances in Accounting 13: 21-37.
3. Bamber, E. M. 1983. Expert judgment in the audit team-A source reliability approach. Journal of Accountinog Research 21 (2): 396-413.
4. 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: 48-74.
5. Bowman, A. 2000. End of a run: National firms' growth rate slowed in FY99. Public Accounting Report (March 31): S1-S2.
6. Chaiken, S., A. Lieberman, and A. H. Eagly. 1989. Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In Unintended Thought: Limits of Awareness, Intention, and Control, edited by J. S. Uleman, and J. A. Bargh, 212-252. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
7. Chaiken, S., A. Lieberman, A. H. Eagly., and D. Maheswaran. 1994. Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 66: 460-473.
8. Chaiken, S., A. Lieberman, A. H. Eagly., D. Maheswaran., R. Giner-Sorolla, and S. Chen. 1996. Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information procession. In The Psychology of Actions: Linking Cognition and Motivation to Behavior, edited by P. M. Gollwitzer, and J. A. Bargh, 553-578. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9. Chen, S., and S. Chaiken. 1999. The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology, edited by S. Chaiken, and Y. Trope, 73-96. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
10. Cloyd, C. B., and B. Spilker. 1999. The influence of client preferences on tax professionals' search for judicial precedents, subsequent judgments, and recommendations. The Accounting Review 74 (July): 299-322.
11. Eagly, A. H., and S. Chaiken. 1993. The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
12. General Electric (GE). 2002. Proxy Statement: Independent Auditor Fees. March 8. Fairfield, CT: GE.
13. Hilzenrath, D. S. 2001. After Enron, new doubts about auditors. Washington Post (December 5): A1.
14. Hirst, D. E. 1994. Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability. Journal of Accounting Research 32: 113-126.
15. Mason, J. D., and L. G. Levy. 2002. The use of the latent constructs method in behavioral accounting research: the measurement of client advocacy. Advances in Taxation 13: 123-139.
16. Novak, J., and L Saunders. 1998. The hustling of X-rated shelters. Forbes (December 14): 198.
17. Petty, R. E., and J. T. Cacioppo. 1986. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 29, edited by L. Berkowitz, 123-205. New York, NY: Academic Press.
18. Sternthal, B., L. Phillips, and R. Dholakia. 1978. The persuasive effect of source credibility: A situational analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly 42: 285-314.
19. U.S. Department of the Treasury. 1999. The Problem of Corporate Tax Shelters: Discussion, Analysis and Legislative Proposals. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.