A test of changes in auditors' fraud-related planning judgments since the issuance of SAS No. 82

Auditing

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 237-251

  Glover, Steven M ^a   Prawitt, Douglas F ^a   Schultz Jr , Joseph J ^b   Zimbelman, Mark F ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Audit planning; Fraud detection; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042556287     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2003.22.2.237     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Albrecht, C., Albrecht, S., and G. Dunn. 2001. Can auditors detect fraud: A review of the research evidence. Journal of Forensic Accounting 2: 1-12.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1988. The Auditor's Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 53. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 1994. The auditor's responsibility to detect fraud. The CPA Letter (January).
4. _. 1997. Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 82. New York, NY: AICPA.
5. _. 2002. Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99. New York, NY: AICPA.
6. Asare, S., and A. Wright. 2002. The impact of fraud risk assessments and a standard audit program on fraud detection plans. Working paper, University of Florida.
7. Bedard, J., T. Mock, and A. Wright. 1999. Evidential planning in auditing: A review of the empirical research. Journal of Accounting Literature 18: 96-142.
8. Bell, T., F. Marrs, I. Solomon, and H. Thomas. 1997. Auditing Organizations Through a Strategic-Systems Lens: The KPMG Business Measurement Process. Montvale, NJ: KPMG Peat Marwick LLP.
9. Bonner, S., and P. Walker. 1994. The effects of instruction and experience on the acquisition of auditing knowledge. The Accounting Review 69: 157-178.
10. Chewning, G., K. Pany, and S. Wheeler. 1989. Auditor reporting decisions involving accounting principle changes: Some evidence on materiality thresholds. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 78-96.
11. Cook, T. D., and D. T. Campbell. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design & Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
12. Dopuch, N., R. W. Holthausen, and R. W. Leftwich. 1986. Abnormal stock returns associated with media disclosures of "subject to" qualified audit opinions. Journal of Accounting and Economics 8: 93-117.
13. Erickson, M., B. W. Mayhew, and W. L. Felix, Jr. 2000. Why do audits fail? Evidence from Lincoln Savings and Loan. Journal of Accounting Research (Spring): 165-194.
14. Fellingham, J. C., and D. P. Newman. 1985. Strategic considerations in auditing. The Accounting Review 60: 634-650.
15. Guy, D., and J. Sullivan. 1988. The expectation gap auditing standards. Journal of Accountancy (April): 36-46.
16. Herz, P. J., and J. J. Schultz, Jr. 1999. The role of procedural knowledge in accounting judgment. Behavioral Research in Accounting 11: 1-26.
17. King, R. R., and R. Schwartz. 1997. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: A discussion of three provisions. Accounting Horizons (March): 92-106.
18. Knapp, C. A., and M. C. Knapp. 2001. The effects of experience and explicit fraud risk assessment in detecting fraud with analytical procedures. Accounting, Organizations and Society 26: 25-37.
19. Lemon, W. M., K. W. Tatum, and W. S. Turley. 2000. Developments in the audit methodologies of large accounting firms. Caxton Hill, Hertford, U.K.: Stephen Austin & Sons Ltd.
20. Libby, R. 1995. The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment. In Judgment and Decision-Making Research in Accounting and Auditing, edited by R. H. Ashton, and A. H. Ashton. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
21. Mancino, J. 1997. The auditor and fraud. Journal of Accountancy (April): 32-36.
22. Mautz, R., and H. Sharaf. 1961. The Philosophy of Auditing. Monograph No. 6. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
23. Messier, W. F., Jr., S. J. Kachelmeier, and K. Jensen. 2001. An experimental assessment of recent professional developments in nonstatistical audit sampling guidance. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (March): 81-96.
24. Nieschwietz, R. N., J. J. Schultz, Jr., and M. F. Zimbelman. 2000. Empirical research on external auditors' detection of financial statement fraud. Journal of Accounting Literature 19: 190-246.
25. Shelton, S. W., O. R. Whittington, and D. Landsittel. 2001. Auditing firms' fraud risk assessment practices. Accounting Horizons (March): 19-33.
26. Shibano, T. 1990. Assessing audit risk for errors and irregularities. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 110-140.
27. Wilks, T. J., and M. F. Zimbelman. 2002. Academic research and auditors' detection of fraudulent financial reporting: Using audit policy to encourage strategic-reasoning in practice. Working paper, Brigham Young University.
28. Zimbelman, M. F. 1996. Assessing the risk of fraud in audit planning. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Arizona.
29. _. 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.
30. _, and W. S. Waller. 1999. An experimental investigation of auditor-auditee interaction under ambiguity. Journal of Accounting Research (Supplement): 135-155.