Order effects and the audit materiality revision choice

Journal of Applied Business Research

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 21-

  Brown, Charles A ^a  

^a BEHREND COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditor judgment; Belief revision; Materiality; Order effects

Indexed keywords

EID: 58149387656     PISSN: 08927626     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (48)

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 (March), 71-88.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). (2001). AICPA Professional Standards, Vol. 1. New York: AICPA, Inc.
3. Anderson, B. H., and Maletta, M. J. (1999). Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor belief-revision processes. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18 (Spring), 75-89.
4. Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
5. Anderson, N. H., and Hubert, S. (1963). Effects of concomitant verbal recall on order effects in personality impression formation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 2, 379-391.
6. Arnold, V., Collier, P. A., Leech, S. A., and Sutton, S. G. (2000). The effect of experience and complexity on order and recency bias in decision making by professional accountants. Accounting and Finance, 40 (July), 109-134.
7. 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.
8. Ashton, A. H., and R. H. Ashton. (1988). Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review, 63 (October), 623-641.
9. Ashton, R. H., and Kennedy, J. (2002). Eliminating recency with self-review: The case of auditors' going concern judgments. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15 (July), 221-231.
10. Boatsman, J. R., and Robertson, J. C. (1974). Policy-capturing on selected materiality judgments. The Accounting Review, 49 (April), 342-352.
11. Braun, K. W. (2001). The disposition of audit-detected misstatements: An examination of risk and reward factors and aggregation effects. Contemporary Accounting Research, 18 (Spring), 71 -99.
12. Chewning, G., Pany, K., and Wheeler, S. (1989). Auditor reporting decisions involving accounting principle changes: Some evidence on materiality thresholds. Journal of Accounting Research, 27 (Spring), 78-96.
13. Chewning, G., Wheeler, S., and Chan, K. (1998). Evidence on auditor and investor materiality thresholds resulting from equity-for-debt swaps. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 17 (Spring), 39-53.
14. Cushing, B. E., and Ahlawat, S. S. (1996). Mitigation of recency bias in audit judgment: The effect of documentation. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 15 (Fall), 110-122.
15. Dillard, J. F., Kauffman, N. L., and Spires, E. E. (1991). Evidence order and belief revision in management accounting decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 16 (7), 619-633.
16. Favere-Marchesi, M. (2006). "Order effects" revisited: The importance of chronology. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 25 (1), 69-83.
17. Friedberg, A. H., Strawser, J. R., and Cassidy, J. H. (1989). Factors affecting materiality judgments: A comparison of big eight accounting firms materiality views with the results of empirical research. In B. N. Schwartz (ed.), Advances in Accounting, 7, (187-201). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.
18. Guiral-Contreras, A., Gonzalo-Angulo, J. A., and Rodgers, W. (2007). Information content and recency effect of the audit report in loan rating decisions. Accounting and Finance, 47 (2), 285-304.
19. Hendrick, C., and Costantini, A. F. (1970). Effects of varying trait inconsistency and response requirements on the primacy effect in impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 15 (2), 158-164.
20. Hogarth, R. M., and Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24,1-55.
21. Holstrum, G. L., and Messier, W. F., Jr. (1982). A review and integration of empirical research on materiality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 2 (Fall), 45-63.
22. Hunton, J. E. (2001). Mitigating the common information sampling bias inherent in small-group discussion. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 13, 171-193.
23. Jennings, M., Kneer, D., and Reckers, P. (1987). A reexamination of the concept of materiality: Views of auditors, users, and officers of the court. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 6 (Spring), 104- 115.
24. Johnson, E. N. (1995). Effects of information order, group assistance, and experience on auditors' sequential belief revision. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16 (March), 137-160.
25. Kennedy, J. (1993). Debiasing audit judgment with accountability: A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research, 31 (Autumn), 231-245.
26. Krogstad, J. L., Ettenson, R. T., and Shanteau, J. (1984). Context and experience in auditors' materiality judgments. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 4 (Fall), 54-73.
27. Krull, G., Jr., Reckers, P. M. J., and Wong-on-Wing, B. (1993). The effect of experience, fraudulent signals and information presentation order on auditors' beliefs. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 12 (Fall), 143-153.
28. Marsh, T. L. (1997). An empirical examination of materiality by factor analysis and cognitive mapping of user and preparer groups. Dissertation Abstracts International, 58 (03), p. 970 (Publication No. AAT9727022).
29. Messier, W. F., Jr. (1983). The effect of experience and firm type on materiality/ disclosure judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 21 (Autumn), 611-618.
30. 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.
31. Messier, W. F., Jr., and Tubbs, R. M. (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.
32. . Monroe, G. S., and Ng, J. (2000). An examination of order effects in auditors' inherent risk assessments. Accounting and Finance, 40 (2), 153-168.
33. Moriarity, S., and Barron, F. H. (1979). A judgment-based definition of materiality. Journal of Accounting Research, 17 (supplement), 114-135.
34. Pany, K., and Wheeler, S. (1989). Materiality: An inter-industry comparison of the magnitudes and stabilities of various quantitative measures. Accounting Horizons, 3 (December), 71-78.
35. Pattillo, J. W. (1976). The concept of materiality in financial reporting. New York, NY: Financial Executives Research Foundation.
36. Pei, B. K. W., Reckers, P. M. J., and Wyndelts, R. W. (1992a). Tax professionals belief revision: The effects of information presentation sequence, client preference, and domain experience. Decision Sciences, 23 (January/February), 175-199.
37. Pei, B. K. W., Reed, S. A., and Koch, B. S. (1992b). Auditor belief revisions in a performance auditing setting: An application of the belief-adjustment model. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17 (2), 169-183.
38. Reckers, P. M. J., and Schultz, J. J., Jr. (1993). The effects of fraud signals, evidence order, and groupassisted counsel on independent auditor judgment. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 5, 124-144.
39. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). (1999). SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin: No. 99 - Materiality. Washington, DC: SEC.
40. Slipp, J. (1983). Materiality: A practitioner's dilemma. CA Magazine, 116 (January), 62-63.
41. Steinbart, P. J. (1987). The construction of a rule-based expert system as a method for studying materiality judgments. The Accounting Review, 62 (January), 96-116.
42. Trotman, K. T., and Wright, A. (1996). Recency effects: Task complexity, decision mode, and taskspecific experience. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 8,175-193.
43. Tubbs, R. M., Messier, W. F., Jr., and Knechel, W. R. (1990). Recency effects in the auditor's beliefrevision process. The Accounting Review, 65 (April), 452-460.
44. Turtle, B., Coller, M., and Burton, F. G. (1997). An examination of market efficiency: Information order effects in a laboratory market. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 22 (1), 89-103.
45. Walker, R. H. (1999). In quotes: The SEC director of enforcement addresses the importance of being independent. Auditor independence: The issues. The CPA Journal, 69 (5), 44-50.
46. Waters, J. M., II, and Tiller, M. G. (1997). Auditors' materiality thresholds: Some empirical findings based on real data. American Business Review, 15 (June), 115-119.
47. Wheeler, S., Pany, K., and Chewning, E. (1993). Inter-firm differences in propensities to modify audit opinions for pre-SAS No. 58 accounting principle changes. Accounting Horizons, 7 (September), 46-54.
48. Wright, A., and Wright, S. (1997). An examination of factors affecting the decision to waive audit adjustments. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 12 (Winter), 15-36.