Concede or deny: Do management persuasion tactics affect auditor evaluation of internal control deviations?

Accounting Review

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 2013-2037

  Wolfe, Christopher J ^a   Mauldin, Elaine G ^b   Diaz, Michelle Chandler ^a  

^a TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Audit judgment; Internal control deficiency; Persuasion tactic

Indexed keywords

EID: 73349128413     PISSN: 00014826     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/accr.2009.84.6.2013     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aerts, W. 2005. Picking up the pieces: Impression management in the retrospective attributional framing of accounting outcomes. Accounting, Organizations and Society 30 (6): 493-517.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2006. Understanding the Entity and Its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement. Statement on Auditing Standard No. 109. New York: AICPA.
3. Anderson, U., K. Kadous, and L. Koonce. 2004. The role of incentives to manage earnings and quantification in auditors' evaluations of management-provided information. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 23 (1): 11-27.
4. Ashton, R. 1974. An experimental study of internal control judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 12 (1): 143-157.
5. Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (6): 1173-1182.
6. Barton, J., and M. Mercer. 2005. To blame or not to blame: Analysts' reactions to external explanations for poor financial performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics 39: 509-533.
7. Bedard, J., and L. Graham. 2008. Archival evidence on processes and outcomes of internal control assessment under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley act. Working paper, Bentley University.
8. Bettman, J., and B. Weitz. 1983. Attributions in the board room: Causal reasoning in corporate annual reports. Administrative Science Quarterly 28: 165-183.
9. Bies, R. J., and D. L. Shapiro. 1987. Interactional fairness judgments: The influence of causal accounts. Social Justice Research 1: 199-218.
10. -, -, and L. L. Cummings. 1988. Causal accounts and managing organizational conflict - Is it enough to say it's not my fault? Communication Research 15: 381-399.
11. Bottom, W. P., K. Gibson, S. Daniels, and J. K. Murnighan. 2002. When talk is not cheap: Substantive penance and expressions of intent in rebuilding cooperation. Organization Science 13: 497-513.
12. Boury, P., and C. M. Spruce. 2005. Auditors at the gate: Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the increased role of auditors in corporate governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance 2 (1): 27-52.
13. Gansler, J. S., and W. Lucyshyn. 2005. Improving the security of financial management systems: What are we to do? Journal of Accounting and Public Policy 24: 1-9.
14. Hackenbrack, K. 1992. Implications of seemingly irrelevant audit evidence in audit judgment. Journal of Accounting Research 30 (1): 126-136.
15. Hareli, S. 2005. Accounting for one's behavior - What really determines its effectiveness? Its type or its content? Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 35 (4): 359-372.
16. Heuberger, J. H., and B. J. Nepf. 2005. Taking control of internal control reporting: Recent PCAOB and SEC guidance. Insights: The Corporate & Securities Law Advisor 19 (7): 2-9.
17. Hirst, D. E. 1994. Auditor sensitivity to earnings management. Contemporary Accounting Research 11 (1): 405-422.
18. Jackson, R. A. 2007. The human side of risk. Internal Auditor 64 (5): 38-44.
19. Keil, F. C. 2006. Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology 57: 227-254.
20. Kelton, K., K. R. Fleischmann, and W. A. Wallace. 2008. Trust in digital information. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 (3): 363-374.
21. Kim, P. H., C. D. Cooper, D. L. Ferrin, and K. T. Dirks. 2004. Removing the shadow of suspicion: The effects of apology versus denial for repairing competence-versus integrity-based trust violations. The Journal of Applied Psychology 89 (1): 104 - 118.
22. -, K. T. Dirks, C. D. Cooper, and D. L. Ferrin. 2006. When more blame is better than less: The implications of internal versus external attributions for the repair of trust after a competence-versus integrity-based trust violation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 99 (1): 49-65.
23. King, R. R. 2002. An experimental investigation of self-serving biases in an auditing trust game: The effect of group affiliation. The Accounting Review 77 (2): 265-284.
24. Kline, R. B. 2005. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
25. Libby, R., J. Artman, and J. Willingham. 1985. Process susceptibility, control risk, and audit planning. The Accounting Review 60 (2): 212-230.
26. Morris, M. W., P. C. Moore, and D. L. Sim. 1999. Choosing remedies after accidents: Counterfactual thoughts and the focus of fixing human error. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 6: 579-585.
27. Naquin, C. E., and T. R. Kurtzberg. 2004. Human reactions to technological failure: How accidents rooted in technology versus human error influence judgments of organizational accountability. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 93: 129-141.
28. Nelson, M. W., J. A. Elliott, and R. L. Tarpley. 2002. Evidence from auditors about managers' and auditors' earnings management decisions. The Accounting Review 77 (Supplement): 175-202.
29. Nisbett, R. E., H. Zukier, and R. E. Lemley. 1981. The dilution effect: Non-diagnostic information weakens the implications of diagnostic information. Cognitive Psychology 13: 248-277.
30. Nissenbaum, H. 1994. Computing and accountability. Communications of the ACM 37 (1): 73-80.
31. Ohbuchi, K., M. Kameda, and N. Agarie. 1989. Apology as aggression control: Its role in mediating appraisal of and response to harm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56: 219-227.
32. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2007. An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements. Auditing Standard No. 5. Washington, D.C.: PCAOB.
33. Ricchiute, D. N. 1999. The effect of audit seniors' decisions on working paper documentation and on partners' decisions. Accounting, Organizations and Society 24: 155-171.
34. Schwartz, G., T. Kane, J. Joseph, and J. T. Tedeschi. 1978. The effects of remorse on the reactions of a harm-doer. The British Journal of Social Psychology 17: 293-297.
35. Shapiro, D. L., E. H. Buttner, and B. Barry. 1994. Explanations: What factors enhance their perceived adequacy? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 58: 346-368.
36. Stata Press. 2005. Stata Reference Manual. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
37. Sundar, S. S., and C. Nass. 2000. Source orientation in human-computer interaction: Programmer, networker, or independent social actor. Communication Research 27: 683-703.
38. Tabachnick, B. G., and L. S. Fidell. 2000. Computer-Assisted Research Design and Analysis. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
39. Tata, J. 2002. The influence of accounts on perceived social loafing in work teams. The International Journal of Conflict Management 13 (3): 292-308.
40. Trotman, K. T., A. M. Wright, and S. Wright. 2005. Auditor negotiations: An examination of the efficacy of intervention methods. The Accounting Review 80 (1): 349-367.
41. Tversky, A., and D. Kahneman. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185: 1124-1131.