Fraudulent management explanations and the impact of alternative presentations of client business evidence

Auditing

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 153-171

  Wright, William F ^a   Berger, Leslie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b BROCK UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Analytical procedures; Information presentation; Management explanation; Management fraud; Risk based auditing

Indexed keywords

EID: 80051745859     PISSN: 02780380     EISSN: 15587991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/ajpt-50010     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Allen, R. D., D. R. Hermanson, T. M. Kozloski, and R. J. Ramsay. 2006. Auditor risk assessment: Insights from the academic literature. Accounting Horizons 20 (2): 157-177.
2. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 2002. Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99. New York, NY: 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): 11-28.
4. Anderson, U., and L. Koonce. 1998. Evaluating the sufficiency of causes in audit analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 17 (1): 1-12.
5. Ashton, A. H., and R. H. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review 63: 623-641.
6. Ballou, B., C. E. Earley, and J. S. Rich. 2004. The impact of strategic-positioning information on auditor judgments about business-process performance. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 23 (2): 71-88.
7. Beaulieu, P. R. 2001. The effects of judgments of new clients' integrity upon risk judgments, audit evidence, and fees. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 20 (2): 85-99.
8. Bedard, J. C., and S. F. Biggs. 1991a. The effect of domain-specific experience on evaluation of management representations in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory (Supplement): 77-90.
9. Bedard, J. C., and S. F. Biggs. 1991b. Pattern recognition, hypotheses generation, and auditor performance in an analytical task. The Accounting Review 66 (July): 622-642.
10. Bell, T., F. Marrs, I. Solomon, and H. Thomas. 1997. Auditing Organizations Through a Strategic-Systems Lens: The KPMG Business Measurement Process. Montvale, NJ: KPMG.
11. Bell, T. B., M. E. Peecher, and I. Solomon. 2002. The strategic-systems approach to auditing. In Cases in Strategic-Systems Auditing, edited by Bell, T., and I. Solomon, 1-34. Montvale, NJ: KPMG LLP.
12. Bell, T. B., M. E. Peecher, and I. Solomon. 2005. The 21st Century Public Company Audit. KPMG LLP. Available at: http://www.business.illinois.edu/kpmg-uiuccases/monograph2.pdf.
13. Bhattacharjee, S., T. Kida, and D. M. Hanno. 1999. The impact of hypothesis set size on the time efficiency and accuracy of analytical review judgments. Journal of Accounting Research 37 (1): Spring: 83-100.
14. Bonner, S. E., R. Libby, and M. W. Nelson. 1996. Using decision aids to improve auditors' conditional probability judgments. The Accounting Review 71 (2): 221-240.
15. Buckless, F. A., and S. P. Ravenscroft. 1990. Contrast coding: A refinement of ANOVA in behavioral analysis. The Accounting Review 65 (4): 933-945.
16. Butt, J., and T. L. Campbell. 1989. The effects of information order and hypothesis-testing strategies on auditor's judgments. Accounting, Presentations and Society 14 (5/6): 471-479.
17. Chesbrough, H., and R. S. Rosenbloom. 2002. The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: Evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies. Industrial and Corporate Change 11 (3): 529-555.
18. Cohen, J. R., G. Krishnamoorthy, and A. Wright. 2000. Evidence on the effect of financial and nonfinancial trends on analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19 (1): 27-48.
19. Eilifsen, A., W. R. Knechel, and P. Wallage. 2001. Application of the business risk audit model: A field study. Accounting Horizons 15 (3): 193-207.
20. Glover, S. M., J. Jiambalvo, and J. Kennedy. 2000. Analytical procedures and audit-planning decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 19 (2): 27-45.
21. Glover, S. M., D. F. Prawitt, and T. J. Wilks. 2005. Why do auditors over-rely on weak analytical procedures? The role of outcome and insensitivity to precision. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 24 (Supplement): 197-220.
22. Green, W. J., and K. T. Trotman. 2003. An examination of different performance outcomes in an analytical procedures task. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22 (2): 219-235.
23. Haynes, C. M. 1999. Auditors' evaluation of evidence obtained through management inquiry: A cascadedinference approach. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 18 (2): 87-102.
24. Heiman, V. B. 1990. Auditors' assessments of the likelihood of error explanations in analytical review. The Accounting Review 65 (4): 875-890.
25. Heiman-Hoffman, V. B., D. V. Moser, and J. A. Joseph. 1995. The impact of an auditor's initial hypothesis on subsequent performance at identifying actual errors. Contemporary Accounting Research 11 (2): 763-779.
26. Hirst, D. E. 1994. Auditors' sensitivity to source reliability. Journal of Accounting Research 32 (1): 113-126.
27. Hirst, D. E., and L. Koonce. 1996. Audit analytical procedures: A field investigation. Contemporary Accounting Research 13 (2): 457-487.
28. Kizirian, T. G., B. W. Mayhew, and L. D. Sneathen, Jr. 2005. The impact of management integrity on audit planning and evidence. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 24 (2): 49-67.
29. Knechel, W. R. 2007. The business risk audit: Origins, obstacles and opportunities. Accounting, Presentations and Society 32 (4-5): 383-408.
30. Knechel, W. R., S. E. Salterio, and N. Kochetova-Kozloski. 2009. The effect of benchmarked performance measures and strategic analysis on auditors' risk assessments and mental models. Accounting, Organizations and Society 35 (3): 316-333.
31. Koonce, L. 1993. A cognitive characterization of audit analytical review. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12: 57-67.
32. Koonce, L., and F. Phillips. 1996. Auditors' comprehension and evaluation of client-suggested causes in analytical procedures. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 32-48.
33. Krishnamoorthy, G., and A. Wright. 1999. A framework for assessing the value of management inquiry. International Journal of Auditing 3: 5-20.
34. McDaniel, L. S., and W. R. Kinney, Jr. 1995. Expectation-formation guidance in the auditor's review of interim financial information. Journal of Accounting Research 33 (1): 59-76.
35. McDaniel, L. S., and L. E. Simmons. 2007. Auditors' assessment and incorporation of expectation precision in evidential analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 26 (1): 1-18.
36. Meder, B., Y. Hagmayer, and M. R. Waldmann. 2008. Inferring interventional predictions from observational learning data. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 15 (1): 75-80.
37. Messier W. F., Jr., S. M. Glover, and D. F. Prawitt. 2006. Auditing and Assurance Services: A Systematic Approach, Fourth Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
38. 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 Practice & Theory 13: 57-72.
39. Moreno, K. K., S. Bhattacharjee, and D. M. Brandon. 2007. The effectiveness of alternative training techniques on analytical procedures performance. Contemporary Accounting Research 24 (3): 983-1014.
40. Nelson, M. W., R. Libby, and S. E. Bonner. 1995. Knowledge structure and the estimation of conditional probabilities in audit planning. The Accounting Review 70 (1): 27-47.
41. O'Donnell, E., and J. J. Schultz, Jr. 2003. The influence of business-process-focused audit support software on analytical procedures judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 22 (2): 265-279.
42. O'Donnell, E., and J. J. Schultz, Jr. 2005. The halo effect in business risk audits: Can strategic risk assessment bias auditor judgment about accounting details? The Accounting Review 80 (3): 921-939.
43. Palepu, K. G., and P. M. Healy. 2008. Business Analysis and Valuation, Fourth Edition. Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
44. Peecher, M. 1996. The influence of auditors' justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 34 (1): 125-140.
45. Peecher, M., R. Schwartz, and I. Solomon. 2007. It's all about audit quality: Perspectives on strategicsystems auditing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 32 (4-5): 463-485.
46. Pennington, N., and R. Hastie. 1986. Evidence evaluation in complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (2): 242-258.
47. Pennington, N., and R. Hastie. 1988. Explanation-based decision making: Effects of memory structure on judgment. Journal of Experiment Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 14 (3): 521-533.
48. Ricchiute, D. N. 1992. Working-paper order effects and auditors' going-concern decisions. The Accounting Review 67 (1): 46-58.
49. Schultz, J. J., Jr., J. L. Bierstaker, and E. O'Donnell. 2010. Integrating business risk into auditor judgment about the risk of material misstatement: The influence of a strategic-systems-audit approach. Accounting, Organizations and Society 35 (2): 238-251.
50. Steyvers, M. J., J. B. Tenenbaum, E. J. Wagenmakers, and B. Blum. 2003. Inferring causal networks from observations and interventions. Cognitive Science 27: 453-489.
51. Trompeter, G., and A. Wright. 2007. The world has changed: Have analytical procedure practices? Working paper, Northeastern University.
52. Trotman, K. T., and A. Wright. 2000. Order effects and recency: Where do we go from here? Accounting and Finance 40: 169-182.
53. 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.
54. Vera-Muñoz, S. C., W. R. Kinney, Jr., and S. E. Bonner. 2001. The effects of domain experience and task presentation format on accountants' information relevance assurance. The Accounting Review 76 (3): 405-429.
55. Waldmann, M. R., and Y. Hagmayer. 2005. Seeing versus doing: Two modes of accessing causal knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 31 (2): 216-227.
56. Wilks, T. J., and M. F. Zimbelman. 2004. Using game theory and strategic reasoning concepts to prevent and detect fraud. Accounting Horizons 18 (3): 173-184.