The effects of the need for cognition in audit sampling

Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research

Volumn 15, Issue , 2012, Pages 29-52

  Ford, Caroline O ^a   Pasewark, William R ^b  

^a BAYLOR UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884505523     PISSN: 14751488     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1108/S1475-1488(2012)0000015006     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Allen, R. D., & Elder, R. J. (2005). A longitudinal investigation of auditor error projection decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 24(2), 69-84.
2. Anderson, B. H., & Maletta, M. J. (1999). Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor beliefrevision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18, 75-99.
3. Ashton, R. H., & Ashton, A. H. (Eds.). (1995). Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
4. Bamber, E. M., Snowball, D., & Tubbs, R. M. (1989). Audit structure and its relation to role conflict and role ambiguity: An empirical investigation. The Accounting Review, 64, 285-299.
5. Baron, R., Logan, H., Lilly, J., Inman, M., & Brennan, M. (1994). Negative emotion and message processing. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 181-201.
6. Bedard, J. C., Ettredge, M. L., & Johnstone, K. M. (2007). Using electronic audit workpaper systems in audit practice: Task analysis, learning, and resistance. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research, 10, 29-53.
7. Bonner, S. E., & Pennington, N. (1991). Cognitive processes and knowledge as determinants of auditor expertise. Journal of Accounting Literature, 10, 1-50.
8. Brennan, I., & Bahn, K. D. (2006). Literal versus extended symbolic messages and advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of need for cognition. Psychology and Marketing, 23(4), 273-295.
9. Bryant, S., Murthy, U., & Wheeler, P. (2009). The effects of cognitive style and feedback type on performance in an internal control task. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 21(1), 37-58.
10. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116-131.
11. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197-253.
12. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Kao, C. F. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 306-307.
13. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1032-1043.
14. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Morris, K. J. (1983). Effects of need for cognition on message evaluation, recall, and persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 805-818.
15. Chan, M. K. (1995). The moderating effects of cognitive style and recency effects on the auditors' belief revision process. Managerial Auditing Journal, 10(9), 22-28.
16. Cheng, M., Luckett, P., & Schulz, A. (2003). The effects of cognitive style diversity on decisionmaking dyads: An empirical analysis in the context of a complex task. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 15, 39-62.
17. Chenhall, R., & Morris, D. (1991). The effect of cognitive style and sponsorship bias on the treatment of opportunity costs in resource allocation decisions. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 16, 27-46.
18. Coutinho, S., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Skowronski, J. J., & Britt, M. A. (2005). Metacognition, need for cognition and use of explanations during ongoing learning and problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 15(4), 321-337.
19. Elder, R. J., & Allen, R. D. (2003). A longitudinal field investigation of auditor risk assessments and sample size decisions. The Accounting Review, October, 983-1002.
20. Espejo, J., Day, E. A., & Scott, G. (2005). Performance evaluations, need for cognition, and the acquisition of a complex skill: An attribute-treatment interaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1867-1877.
21. Fuller, L. R., & Kaplan, S. E. (2004). A note about the effect of auditor cognitive style on task performance. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 16, 131-143.
22. Furlong, P. (1993). Personal factors influencing informal reasoning of economic issues and the effect of specific instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 181-191.
23. Hall, T. W., Herron, T. L., Pierce, B. J., & Witt, T. J. (2001). The effectiveness of increasing sample size to mitigate the influence of population characteristics in haphazard sampling. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 20(1), 169-185.
24. Haugtvedt, C. P., & Petty, R. E. (1992). Personality and persuasion: Need for cognition moderates the persistence and resistance of attitude changes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 308-319.
25. Hitzig, N. B. (2004). Statistical sampling revisited. The CPA Journal, 74(5), 30-35.
26. Ho, J. L., & Rodgers, W. (1993). A review of accounting research on cognitive characteristics. Journal of Accounting Literature, 12, 101.
27. Huneke, M. E. (1996). Comparing consideration set formation and choice: An empirical investigation of information processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Iowa.
28. Inman, J. J., McAlister, L., & Hoyer, W. D. (1990). Promotion signal: proxy for a price cut? Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 74-81.
29. Janvrin, D., Bierstaker, J., & Lowe, D. J. (2008). An examination of audit information technology use and perceived importance. Accounting Horizons, 22(1), 1-21.
30. Kernis, M. H., Grannemann, B. D., & Barclay, L. C. (1992). Stability of self-esteem: Assessments, correlates, and excuse making. Journal of Personality, 60, 621-644.
31. Kobbeltvedt, T., Brun, W., & Laberg, J. C. (2005). Cognitive processes in planning and judgments under sleep deprivation and time pressure. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98(1), 1-14.
32. Kogan, N. (1973). Creativity and cognitive styles: A life-span perspective. In P. B. Baltes & K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Personality and socialization. New York, NY: Academic Press.
33. Krishnamoorthy, G., Mock, T. J., & Washington, M. T. (1999). A comparative evaluation of belief revision models in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18, 105-127.
34. Kuvaas, B., & Kaufmann, G. (2004). Impact of mood, framing, and need for cognition on decision makers' recall and confidence. Journal of Behavioral DecisionMaking, 17, 59-74.
35. Leippe, M., Eisenstadt, R. D., Rauch, S. M., & Seib, H. M. (2004). Timing of eyewitness expert testimony, jurors' need for cognition, and case strength as determinants of trial verdicts. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 524-541.
36. Leone, C., & Ensley, E. (1986). Self-generated attitude change: A person by situation analysis of attitude polarization and attenuation. Journal of Research in Personality, 20, 434-446.
37. Levin, I. P., Huneke, M. E., & Jasper, J. D. (2000). Information processing at successive stages of decision making: Need for cognition and inclusion-exclusion effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(2), 171-193.
38. Libby, R. (1995). The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment. In R. H. Ashton, & A. H. Ashton (Eds.), Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39. McAuliff, B. D., & Kovera, M. B. (2008). Juror need for cognition and sensitivity to methodological flaws in expert evidence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 38(2), 385-408.
40. Messier, W. F., Kachelmeier, S. J., & Jensen, K. L. (2001). An experimental assessment of recent professional developments in nonstatistical audit sampling guidance. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 20(1), 81-96.
41. Olson, K., Camp, C., & Fuller, D. (1984). Curiosity and need for cognition. Psychological Reports, 54, 71-74.
42. Peltier, J. W., & Schibrowsky, J. A. (1994). Need for cognition, advertisement viewing time and memory for advertising stimuli. Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 244-250.
43. Petty, R. E., Brinol, P., Loersch, C., & McCaslin, M. J. (2009). The need for cognition. In M. R. Leary & R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 318-329). New York, NY: Guilford.
44. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on response to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
45. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847-855.
46. Prawitt, D. F. (1995). Staffing assignments for judgment-oriented audit tasks: The effects of structured audit technology and environment. The Accounting Review, 70, 443-465.
47. Priester, J., & Petty, R. E. (1995). Source attributions and persuasion: Perceived honesty as a determinant of message scrutiny. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 637-654.
48. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. (2008). Report on the PCAOB's 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 Inspections of Domestic Annually Inspected Firms: Release No. 2008-008.
49. Sadowski, C. J., & Gulgoz, S. (1992). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the need for cognition scale. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 74, 610.
50. Simon, A. F., Fagley, N. S., & Halleran, J. G. (2004). Decision framing: moderating effects of individual differences and cognitive processing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(2), 77-93.
51. Smith, J. F., & Kida, T. (1991). Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 472-489.
52. Smith, S. M., Haugtvedt, C. P., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Need for cognition and the effects of repeated expression of attitude accessibility and extremity. Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 234-237.
53. Spotts, H. (1994). Evidence of a relationship between need for cognition and chronological age: Implications for persuasion in consumer research. Advances in Consumer Research, 21, 238-243.
54. Witkin, H. A., Oltman, E. R., & Karp, S. A. (1971). A manual for the embedded figures tests. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
55. Youssef, A., & Peterson, C. (1973). Intuitive cascaded inferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 10, 349-358.