Continuous monitoring and the status quo effect

International Journal of Accounting Information Systems

Volumn 11, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 239-252

  Hunton, James E ^a,b   Libby, Darald ^a,b   Libby, Juliet ^a,b   Mauldin, Elaine ^c   Wheeler, Patrick ^c  

^a BENTLEY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Accountability; Continuous monitoring; Justification; Risk aversion

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956770837     PISSN: 14670895     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.accinf.2010.07.016     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Alles M.G., Kogan A., Vasarhelyi M.A. Putting continuous auditing theory into practice: lessons from two pilot implementations. J Inf Syst 2008, 22(2):195-214.
2. Bellizzi J.A., Hite R.E. Supervising unethical salesforce behavior. J Mark 1989, 53(2):36-47.
3. Curley S.P., Yates J.F., Abrams R.A. Psychological sources of ambiguity avoidance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1986, 38(2):230-257.
4. Donaldson S., Grant-Vallone E. Understanding self-report bias in organizational behavior research. J Bus Psychol 2002, 17(2):245-260.
5. Eisenhardt K.M. Agency theory: an assessment and review. Acad Manage Rev 1989, 14(1):57-74.
6. Gaver J., Gaver K., Austin J. Additional evidence on bonus plans and income management. J Acc Econ 1995, 19:3-28.
7. Guidry F., Leone A., Rock S. Earnings-based bonus plans and earnings management by business unit managers. J Acc Econ 1999, 26:113-142.
8. Healy P. The effect of bonus schemes on accounting decisions. J Acc Econ 1985, 7:85-107.
9. Healy P., Wahlen J. A review of the earnings management literature and its implications for standard setting. Acc Horiz 1999, 13:365-383.
10. Holthausen R., Larcker D., Sloan R. Annual bonus schemes and the manipulation of earnings. J Acc Econ 1995, 19:29-74.
11. Hunton J., Mauldin E., Wheeler P. Potential functional and dysfunctional effects of continuous monitoring. Acc Rev 2008, 83(6):1551-1569.
12. Indjejikian R. Performance evaluation and compensation research: an agency perspective. Acc Horiz 1999, 13(2):147-157.
13. Jensen M., Meckling W. Theory of the firm: managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. J Financ Econ 1976, 3:305-360.
14. Kelley H., Michela J. Attribution theory and research. Annu Rev Psychol 1980, 31:457-501.
15. Krell E. Continuous auditing is here to stay. Business Finance 2006, March. Available at: http://businessfinancemag.com/article/continuous-auditing-here-stay-0301.
16. Lerner J., Tetlock P. Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychol Bull 1999, 125(2):255-275.
17. Milliken G.A., Johnson D.E. Analysis of Messy Data 1992, New York, Von Nostrand Reinhold.
18. Roychowdhury S. Earnings management through real activities manipulation. J Acc Econ 2006, 42:335-370.
19. Seigel-Jacobs K., Yates J.F. Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 1996, 65(1):1-17.
20. Stewart W., Roth P. Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: a meta-analytic review. J Appl Psychol 2001, 86(1):145-153.
21. Tetlock P.E. Accountability and complexity of thought. J Pers Soc Psychol 1983, 45:74-83.
22. Tetlock P.E. The impact of accountability on judgment and choice: toward a social contingency model. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 1992, 25:331-376.
23. Tetlock P.E., Boettger R. Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. J Behav Decis Mak 1994, 7:1-23.
24. Tetlock P.E., Skitka L., Boettger R. Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: conformity, complexity, and bolstering. J Pers Soc Psychol 1989, 57(4):632-640.
25. Wason K., Polonsky M., Hyman M. Desigining vignette studies in marketing. Australas Mark J 2002, 10(3):41-58.