"Order effects" revisited: The importance of chronology

Auditing

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 69-83

  Favere Marchesi, Michael ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Chronology; Going concern; Order effects; Presentation order; Temporal order; Trend effect

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845741055     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2006.25.1.69     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ahlawat, S. S. 1999. Order effects and memory for evidence in individual versus group decision making in auditing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 12 (1): 71-88.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1990. The Auditors' Consideration of an Entity's Ability to Continue as a Going-Concern. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 59. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 2002. Omnibus Statement on Auditing Standards-2002. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 98. New York, NY: AICPA.
4. Anderson, B. H., and M. J. Maletta. 1999. Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor belief-revision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Theory & Practice 18 (1): 75-89.
5. Arens, A. A., R. J. Elder, and M. S. Beasley. 2005. Auditing and Assurance Services. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6. Arnold, V., P. Collier, S. A. Leech, and S. Sutton. 2000. The effect of experience on order and recency bias in decision making by professional accountants. Auditing and Finance 40 (2): 107-132.
7. Asare, S. K. 1992. The auditor's going-concern opinion decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review 67 (2): 379-393.
8. Ashton, A. H., and R. H. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review 63 (4): 623-641.
9. Ashton, R. H., and J. Kennedy. 2002. Eliminating recency with self-review: The case of auditors going-concern judgments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15 (3): 221-231.
10. Block, R. A., and D. Zakay. 2001. Retrospective and prospective timing: Memory, attention, and consciousness. In Time and Memory: Issues in Philosophy and Psychology, edited by C. Hoerl, and T. McCormack, 59-76. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
11. Cushing, B. E., and S. S. Ahlawat. 1996. Mitigation of recency bias in audit judgment: The effect of documentation. Auditing: A Journal of Theory & Practice 15 (2): 110-122.
12. Hogarth, R. 1987. Judgment and Choice. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
13. _, and H. Einhorn. 1992. Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24: 1-55.
14. Jones, M., and W. R. Sieck. 2003. Learning myopia: An adaptive recency effect in category learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 29 (4): 626-640.
15. Kennedy, J. 1993. Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research 31 (2): 231-245.
16. Keppel, G., and T. D. Wickens. 2004. Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook. 4th edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17. Matute, H., S. Vegas, and P. De Marez. 2002. Flexible use of recent information in causal and predictive judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 28 (4): 714-725.
18. Messier, W. F. Jr., and R. M. Tubbs. 1994. Recency effects in belief revision: The impact of audit experience and the review process. Auditing: A Journal of Theory & Practice 13 (1): 57-72.
19. Pennington, N., and R. Hastie. 1988. Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 14 (3): 521-533.
20. Ricchiute, D. N. 1998. Evidence, memory, and causal order in a complex audit decision task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 4 (1): 3-15.
21. Smith, J., and T. Kida. 1991. Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. Psychological Bulletin 109: 472-489.
22. Teigen, K. H. 2004. When the past becomes history: Effects of temporal order on explanations of trends. European Journal of Social Psychology 34: 191-206.
23. Trotman, K. T., and A. Wright. 1996. Recency effects: Task complexity, decision mode, and task-specific experience. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 175-193.
24. _, and _. 2000. Order effects and recency: Where do we go from here? Accounting and Finance 40 (2): 169-182.
25. 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 (2): 452-460.