Auditors' assessment and incorporation of expectation precision in evidential analytical procedures

Auditing

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-18

  McDaniel, Linda S ^a   Simmons, Laura E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b International Arbitration and Litigation Practice   (United States)

Author keywords

Analytical procedures; Audit evidence; Expectations; Precision; Substantive test

Indexed keywords

EID: 42149104380     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: 15587991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/aud.2007.26.1.1     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Allen, R., M. Beasley, and B. Branson. 1999. Improving analytical procedures: A case of disaggregated multilocation data. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 128-142.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1986. Auditing Procedures Study: Auditing the Allowance for Credit Losses of Banks. New York, NY: AICPA.
3. _. 1988a. Analytical Procedures. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 56. New York, NY: AICPA.
4. _. 1988b. Auditing Accounting Estimates. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 57. New York, NY: AICPA.
5. _. 1991. General update on economic, industry, regulatory, and accounting and auditing matters. Audit Risk Alert. New York, NY: AICPA.
6. _. 1995. General update on economic, accounting and auditing matters. Audit Risk Alert. New York, NY: AICPA.
7. _. 1997. International Standards on Accounting 520. New York, NY: AICPA.
8. _. 1998a. Auditing Estimates and Other Soft Accounting Information. New York, NY: AICPA.
9. _. 1998b. Auditing Practice Release: Analytical Procedures. New York, NY: AICPA.
10. _. 1998c. The auditor's use of analytical procedures, updated August 15, 1999. Practice Alert 98-1. New York, NY: AICPA.
11. _. 1999. Audit Issues in Revenue Recognition. New York, NY: AICPA.
12. _. 2004a. Audit and Accounting Guide: Analytical Procedures, update. New York, NY: AICPA.
13. _. 2004b. Audit and Accounting Guide: Depository and Lending Institutions: Banks and Savings Institutions, Credit Unions, Finance Companies and Mortgage Companies. New York, NY: AICPA.
14. Asare, S., and A. Wright. 2001. Design consideration for research on analytical procedures. International Journal of Auditing 5: 205-214.
15. Bayless, R. 2001. Financial reporting issues in 2001. Speech delivered at The Practicing Law Institute, Washington, D.C., March 2.
16. Beasley, M., J. Carcello, and D. Hermanson. 2001, Top 10 audit deficiencies. Journal of Accountancy (April): 63-66.
17. Brown, P. 1999. Earnings management: A subtle (and troublesome) twist to earnings quality. Journal of Financial Statement Analysis (Winter): 61-63.
18. Camerer, C., and M. Weber. 1992. Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty: 325-370.
19. Cleaves, D. 1994. Assessing uncertainty in expert judgments about natural resources. General Technical Report SO-110, 1-17. New Orleans, LA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Forest Experimental Station.
20. Coakley, J., and J. Loebbecke. 1985. The expectation of accounting errors in medium sized manufacturing firms. Advances in Accounting: 199-245.
21. Curley, S., and J. F. Yates. 1989. An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 33: 397-427.
22. Dequech, D. 1998. Rationality and institutions under uncertainty. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge.
23. Fischhoff, B., P. Slovic, and S. Lichtenstein. 1977. Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology 3: 552-564.
24. Glover, S., D. Prawitt, and J. Wilks. 2005. Why do auditors over-rely on weak analytical procedures? The role of outcome and precision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 197-220.
25. Griffin, D., and A. Tversky. 1992. The weighting of evidence and the determinants of confidence. Cognitive Psychology 24: 411-435.
26. Heiman-Hoffman, V., D. Moser, and J. Joseph. 1995. The impact of an auditor's initial hypothesis on subsequent performance at identifying actual errors. Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring): 763-780.
27. Ileintz, J., G. White, and J. Bedard. 1999. The effect of data reliability on the influence of unaudited values in audit analytical procedures. International Journal of Auditing 3: 135-146.
28. Hitzig, N. B. 2004. The hidden risk in analytical procedures: What. WorldCom revealed. The CPA Journal (February): 32-34.
29. Hoffman, V., and J. Patton. 1997. Accountability, the dilution effect, and conservatism, in auditors' fraud judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 35: 227-237.
30. Kinney, W., Jr., L. McDaniel, and R. Martin. 2005. Sequential quantification guidance to assist, auditors' subjective assessments in substantive analytical procedures. Working paper. University of Kentucky.
31. Koonce, L. 1992. Explanation and counterexplanation during audit analytical review. Accounting Review (January): 59-76.
32. Krishnamoorthy, G., T. Mock, and M. Washington. 1999. A comparative evaluation of belief revision models in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 105-127.
33. Libby, R., and J. Luft. 1993. Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation, and environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society 18 (5): 425-450.
34. _, R. Bloomfield, and M. Nelson. 2002. Experimental research in financial accounting. Accounting, Organizations and Society 27 (8): 775-810.
35. Lin, K. Z., I. Fraser, and D. Hatherly. 2000. An experimental study of auditor analytical review judgments. Journal of Business Finance and Accounting (September/October): 821-857.
36. McDaniel, L. 2005. Discussion of why do auditors over-rely on weak analytical procedures? The role of outcome and precision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 221-228.
37. Messier, W., Jr., S. Glover, and D. Prawitt. 2006. Auditing and Assurance Services: A Systematic Approach. 4th edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwiri.
38. Odean, T. 1998. Volume, volatility, price, and profit when all traders are above average. Journal of Finance (December): 1887-1934.
39. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. 2002. Achieving the Right Balance. New York, NY: PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.
40. Public Company Accounting Oversight. Board (PCAOB). 2004a. Presentation at the PCAOB Symposium regarding identified issues from, limited inspections. Washington, D.C., December 8.
41. _. 2004b. Report on 2003 Limited Inspection of KPMG LLP. PCAOB Release No. 104-2004-004. August 26. Washington, D.C.: PCAOB.
42. Public Oversight Board (POB), Panel on Audit Effectiveness. 2000. Report and Recommendations. Stamford, CT: POB.
43. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). 2001. Selected Loan Loss Allowance Methodology and Documentation Issues. SAB No. 102. July 6. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
44. Turner, L. 1998. Letter to AICPA from the Office of the Chief Accountant regarding the 1998-1999 audit risk alerts. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. October 9. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
45. _. 2001a, The times, they are a-changing. Speech delivered at Continuing Legal Education in Colorado, Inc., Denver, CO, May 18.
46. _. 2001b. The state of financial reporting today. Speech delivered at the Third Annual SEC Disclosure and Accounting Conference San Francisco, CA, June 21.
47. Winograd, B., J. Gerson, and B. Berlin. 2000. Audit, practices of PricewaterhouseCoopers. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Fall): 175-185.
48. Yates, J. F. 1990. Judgment and Decision Making. Englewood Cliffs, NT: Prentice Hall.