The effect of business process representation type on assessment of business and control risks: Diagrams versus narratives

Issues in Accounting Education

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 895-915

  Efrim Boritz, J ^a   Faye Borthick, A ^b   Presslee, Adam ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Audit documentation methods; BPMN; Business process diagrams; Business process models; Efficiency; Narrative; Risk assessment; Self efficacy; System documentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870827532     PISSN: 07393172     EISSN: 15587983     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2308/iace-50144     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Alencar, P., J. E. Boritz, and C. Carnaghan. 2004. The Relative Merits of Diagrammatic Versus Textual Representations: A Literature Review of Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives. Working paper, University of Waterloo.
2. Alencar, P., J. E. Boritz, and C. Carnaghan. 2008. Approaches to Documenting Business Models. Working paper, University of Waterloo.
3. Amer, T. S. 1993. Entity-relationship and relational database modeling representations for the audit review of accounting applications: an experimental examination of effectiveness. Journal of Information Systems 7 (Spring): 1-15.
4. Bandura, A. 1977. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Behavior 84: 191-215.
5. Bandura, A. 2006. Chapter 14: Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. In Self-Efficacy: Beliefs of Adolescents, edited by Pajares, F., and T. Urdan, 307-337. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
6. Bauer, M. I., and P. N. Johnson-Laird. 1993. How diagrams can improve reasoning. Psychological Science 4: 372-378.
7. Bierstaker, J. L., J. E. Hunton, and J. C. Thibodeau. 2009. Do client-prepared internal control documentation and business process flowcharts help or hinder an auditor's ability to identify missing controls? Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 28 (1): 79-84.
8. Bonner, S. 2008. Judgment and Decision Making in Accounting. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Hall
9. Boritz, J. E. 1981. Audit Documentation of Complex Systems. Paper for Symposium on Computers and Auditing. Toronto, ON: Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.
10. Boritz, J. E. 1984. The effect of information presentation structures on audit planning and review judgments. Contemporary Accounting Research 1 (2): 193-218.
11. Borthick, A. F., G. P. Schneider, and A. Vance. 2012. Using graphical representations of business processes in evaluating internal control. Issues in Accounting Education 27 (1): 123-140.
12. Bradford, M., S. Richtermeyer, and D. Roberts. 2007. System diagramming techniques: An analysis of methods used in accounting education and practice. Journal of Information Systems 21 (2): 173-212.
13. Brna, P., R. Cox, and J. Good. 2001. Learning to think and communicate with diagrams: 14 questions to consider. Artificial Intelligence Review 15: 115-134.
14. Brooke, J. B., and K. D. Duncan. 1980. An experimental study of flowcharts as an aid to identification of procedural faults. Ergonomics 23 (4): 387-399.
15. Carnaghan, C. 2006. Business process modeling approaches in the context of process level audit risk assessment: An analysis and comparison. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 7: 170-204.
16. Cheng, P. H. C., R. K. Lowe, and M. Scaife. 2001. Cognitive science approaches to understanding diagrammatic representations. Artificial Intelligence Review 15: 79-94.
17. Cunniff, N., and R. P. Taylor. 1987. Graphical vs. textual representation: An empirical study of novices' program comprehension. In Empirical Studies of Programmers: Second Workshop, edited by Olson, G. M., S. Sheppard, and E. Soloway, 114-131. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
18. Dunn, C., and G. Gerard. 2001. Auditor efficiency and effectiveness with diagrammatic and linguistic conceptual model representations. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 2 (4): 223-248.
19. Gadh, V. M., R. Krishnan, and J. M. Peters. 1993. Modeling internal controls and their evaluation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 12 (Supplement): 113-137.
20. Gobert, J., and J. J. Clement. 1999. Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36 (1): 39-53.
21. Gilmore, D. J., and H. T. Smith. 1984. An investigation of the utility of flowcharts during computer program debugging. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 20: 357-372.
22. Guri-Rozenblit, S. 1989. Effects of a tree diagram on students' comprehension of main ideas in an expository text with multiple themes. Reading Research Quarterly 24 (2): 236-247.
23. Guthrie, J., S. Weber, and N. Kimmerly. 1993. Searching documents: Cognitive processes and deficits in understanding graphs, tables, and illustrations. Contemporary Educational Psychology 18: 186-221.
24. Hoenig, J. M., and D. M. Heisey. 2001. The abuse of power: The pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. American Statistician 55: 19-24.
25. Holliday, W. G. 1976. Teaching verbal chains using flow diagrams and texts. AV Communication Review 24 (1): 63-78.
26. Howell, D. 2010. Statistical Methods for Psychology. Seventh Edition. Boston, MA: PWS-Kent Publishing Co.
27. International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB). 2006. Understanding the Entity and Its Environment and Assessing the Risks of Material Misstatement (and related appendices). ISA 315. New York, NY: International Federation of Accountants.
28. Jones, R. A., J. J. Tsay, and K. Griggs. 2002. An empirical investigation of the cognitive fit of selected process model diagramming techniques. The Review of Business Information System 6 (4): 1-10.
29. Krohn, G. S. 1983. Flowcharts used for procedural instructions. Human Factors 25 (5): 573-581.
30. Larkin, J. H., and H. A. Simon. 1987. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11: 65-99.
31. Libby, R. 1995. The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment. In Judgment and Decision Making Research in Accounting and Auditing, edited by Ashton, R. H., and A. H. Ashton. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32. Lowe, R. K. 1999. Domain-specific constraints on conceptual change in knowledge acquisition from diagrams. In New Perspectives on Conceptual Change, edited by Vosniadou, S., P. Carretero, and W. Schnotz. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Olivier, P. 2001. Diagrammatic reasoning: An artificial intelligence perspective. Artificial Intelligence Review 15: 63-78.
34. Rose, J. M. 2002. Behavioral decision aid research: Decision aid use and effects. In Researching Accounting as an Information Systems Discipline, Volume V., edited by Arnold, V., and S. G. Sutton, 111-134. Sarasota, FL: American Accounting Association.
35. Salomon, G. 1994. Interaction of Media, Cognition and Learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Scaife, M., and Y. Rogers. 1996. External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45: 185-213.
37. Scanlan, D. A. 1989. Structured flowcharts outperform pseudocode: An experimental comparison. IEEE Software: 28 - 36.
38. Stajkovic, A., and F. Luthans. 1998. Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin 123 (2): 240-261.
39. Stenning, K., and O. Lemon. 2001. Aligning logical and psychological perspectives on diagrammatic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence Review 15 (1/2): 29-62.
40. Stenning, K., and J. J. Oberlander. 1995. A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation. Cognitive Science 19: 97-140.
41. Stevens, J. 1996. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. Third Edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
42. Tan, H-T., and R. Libby. 1997. Tacit managerial versus technical knowledge as determinants of audit expertise in the field. Journal of Accounting Research 35 (1): 97-113.
43. U.S. House of Representatives. 2002. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Public Law 107-204 [H. R. 3763]. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
44. Vessey, I., and R. Weber. 1986. Structured tools and conditional logic: An empirical investigation. Communications of the ACM 29 (1): 48-57.
45. Wood, R., and A. Bandura. 1989. Social cognitive theory of organizational management. Academy of Management Review 14 (3): 361-384.
46. Xiong, Y., and M. Martin. 2006. Mapping internal controls using system documentation tools. The Review of Business Information Systems 10 (1): 83-91.