IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pos/journl/41-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Критерії Оцінки Доказовості Аудиторського Судження
[Criteria of Assessment of the Auditor’s Judgment Evidence]

Author

Listed:
  • Nadiia Manko

    (National Academy of Statistics, Accounting and Audit)

Abstract

The article presents the results of the study on the formation of an independent opinion of the reliability of financial accounting, which is reflected in the auditor’s report and is based on his intermediate conclusions. It has been established that determining the sufficiency of evidence presents a problem that consists in the auditor’s decision on the extent to which they are sufficient to prove the accuracy of his opinion as to the reliability of financial accounting. The study of methodological approaches to assessing the adequacy of audit evidence in the process of performing the audit task was conducted in order to provide evidence of the audit opinion regarding the reliability of the statements of management personnel, contained in the financial report indicators. The article presents the results of the research of scientific approaches concerning the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of audit evidence. Based on the analysis of the provisions of the International Standards on Quality Control, Audit, Inspection, Other Assurance and Related Services (ISA) and literary sources, the main criteria for evaluating audit evidence were identified, their content and terms of security were determined. The relationship between audit procedures and qualitative aspects of financial reporting was considered. Taking into account the requirements of the rules for assessing the reliability of the evidence, provided by the ISA 500 “Audit Evidence”, division of evidence into more and less reliable was made; generalized factors for the consideration in the process of assessing the reliability of evidence were generated. The process of assessing evidence at the stages of the audit task was considered and a conceptual model for assessing the adequacy of audit evidence was constructed.

Suggested Citation

  • Nadiia Manko, 2018. "Критерії Оцінки Доказовості Аудиторського Судження [Criteria of Assessment of the Auditor’s Judgment Evidence]," Traektoriâ Nauki = Path of Science, Altezoro, s.r.o. & Dialog, vol. 4(12), pages 1021-1030, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pos:journl:41-2
    DOI: 10.22178/pos.41-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://pathofscience.org/index.php/ps/article/download/579/590
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22178/pos.41-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    audit evidence; evaluation criteria; approval of management personnel; reliability; adequacy; audit procedures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M42 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Auditing

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pos:journl:41-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Andrey Kataev (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pathofscience.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.