IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aosoci/v20y1995i5p345-357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of the review process in hypothesis generation tasks

Author

Listed:
  • Ismail, Zubaidah
  • Trotman, Ken T.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Ismail, Zubaidah & Trotman, Ken T., 1995. "The impact of the review process in hypothesis generation tasks," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 20(5), pages 345-357, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aosoci:v:20:y:1995:i:5:p:345-357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0361-3682(95)00002-Q
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bonner, Se & Lewis, Bl, 1990. "Determinants Of Auditor Expertise," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28, pages 1-20.
    2. Ramsay, Rj, 1994. "Senior Manager Differences In Audit Workpaper Review Performance," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 127-135.
    3. Cohen, J & Kida, T, 1989. "The Impact Of Analytical Review Results, Internal Control Reliability, And Experience On Auditors Use Of Analytical Review," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 263-276.
    4. Libby, R, 1985. "Availability And The Generation Of Hypotheses In Analytical Review," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 648-667.
    5. Trotman, Kt & Yetton, Pw, 1985. "The Effect Of The Review Process On Auditor Judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 256-267.
    6. Fisher, Stanley D., 1987. "Cue selection in hypothesis generation: Reading habits, consistency checking, and diagnostic scanning," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 170-192, October.
    7. Trotman, Ken T. & Sng, Jennifer, 1989. "The effect of hypothesis framing, prior expectations and cue diagnosticity on auditors' information choice," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 14(5-6), pages 565-576, October.
    8. Trotman, Kt, 1985. "The Review Process And The Accuracy Of Auditor Judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 740-752.
    9. Kida, T, 1984. "The Effect Of Causality And Specificity On Data Use," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 145-152.
    10. Johnson, Paul E. & Jamal, Karim & Berryman, R. Glen, 1991. "Effects of framing on auditor decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 75-105, October.
    11. Libby, R & Frederick, Dm, 1990. "Experience And The Ability To Explain Audit Findings," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 348-367.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Gibbins & Ken T. Trotman, 2002. "Audit Review: Managers' Interpersonal Expectations and Conduct of the Review," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 411-444, September.
    2. Luippold, Benjamin L. & Kida, Thomas & Piercey, M. David & Smith, James F., 2015. "Managing audits to manage earnings: The impact of diversions on an auditor’s detection of earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-54.
    3. Wendy Green, 2008. "Does repetition impair auditors' judgments?," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 23(8), pages 724-743, September.
    4. Stanley F. Biggs & Theodore J. Mock & Roger Simnett, 1999. "Analytical Procedures: Promise, Problems and Implications for Practice," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 9(17), pages 42-52, March.
    5. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3505 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Rich, J. S. & Solomon, I. & Trotman, K. T., 1997. "The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 481-505, July.
    7. Sweeney, John T. & Suh, Ik Seon & Dalton, Kenneth C. & Meljem, Sylvia, 2017. "Are workpaper reviews preparer-specific?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 560-577.
    8. Scott, Thomas W. & Tiessen, P., 1999. "Performance measurement and managerial teams," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 263-285, April.
    9. Trotman, Ken T. & Bauer, Tim D. & Humphreys, Kerry A., 2015. "Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 56-72.
    10. Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2003. "Experimental judgment and decision research in auditing: the first 25 years of AOS," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 395-412, May.
    11. Ditillo, Angelo, 2004. "Dealing with uncertainty in knowledge-intensive firms: the role of management control systems as knowledge integration mechanisms," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(3-4), pages 401-421.
    12. Fabien Cerruti & Christelle Richard, 2008. "Qualité de l'audit et Satisfaction de l'audité : Chronique d'une Innovation Ordinaire," Post-Print halshs-00522438, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rich, J. S. & Solomon, I. & Trotman, K. T., 1997. "The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 481-505, July.
    2. Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2003. "Experimental judgment and decision research in auditing: the first 25 years of AOS," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 395-412, May.
    3. Asare, S. K. & Wright, A., 1997. "Hypothesis revision strategies in conducting analytical procedures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(8), pages 737-755, November.
    4. Causholli, Monika & Floyd, Theresa & Jenkins, Nicole Thorne & Soltis, Scott M., 2021. "The ties that bind: Knowledge-seeking networks and auditor job performance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    5. Luippold, Benjamin L. & Kida, Thomas & Piercey, M. David & Smith, James F., 2015. "Managing audits to manage earnings: The impact of diversions on an auditor’s detection of earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-54.
    6. Stanley F. Biggs & Theodore J. Mock & Roger Simnett, 1999. "Analytical Procedures: Promise, Problems and Implications for Practice," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 9(17), pages 42-52, March.
    7. Dezoort, F. T., 1998. "An analysis of experience effects on audit committee members' oversight judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-21, January.
    8. Carmen B. Ríos-Figueroa & Rogelio J. Cardona, 2013. "Does Experience Affect Auditors’ Professional Judgment? Evidence From Puerto Rico," Accounting & Taxation, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 5(2), pages 13-32.
    9. Rajni Mala & Parmod Chand, 2015. "Judgment and Decision‐Making Research in Auditing and Accounting: Future Research Implications of Person, Task, and Environment Perspective," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 1-50, March.
    10. D. Eric Hirst & Lisa Koonce, 1996. "Audit Analytical Procedures: A Field Investigation," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 457-486, September.
    11. Trotman, Ken T. & Bauer, Tim D. & Humphreys, Kerry A., 2015. "Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 56-72.
    12. Michael Gibbins & Ken T. Trotman, 2002. "Audit Review: Managers' Interpersonal Expectations and Conduct of the Review," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 411-444, September.
    13. Noel Harding, 2010. "Understanding the structure of audit workpaper error knowledge and its relationship with workpaper review performance," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 50(3), pages 663-683, September.
    14. Mu’azu Saidu Badara & Siti Zabedah Saidin, 2013. "The Relationship between Audit Experience and Internal Audit Effectiveness in the Public Sector Organizations," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 3(3), pages 329-339, July.
    15. Freddie Choo & Kim Tan, 2006. "A Commentary on Sample Design Issues in Behavioral Accounting Experiments," Accounting Research Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 19(2), pages 153-158, September.
    16. Shepardson, Marcy L., 2019. "Effects of individual task-specific experience in audit committee oversight of financial reporting outcomes," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 56-74.
    17. Noel Harding & Ken T. Trotman, 1999. "Hierarchical Differences in Audit Workpaper Review Performance," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 671-684, December.
    18. Lau, Yeng Wai, 2014. "Aggregated or disaggregated information first?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(11), pages 2376-2384.
    19. Hung Chan, K. & Mo, Phyllis L. L., 1998. "Ownership effects on audit-detected error characteristics: An empirical study in an emerging economy," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 235-261.
    20. Rita Lamboglia & Daniela Mancini, 2021. "The relationship between auditors’ human capital attributes and the assessment of the control environment," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 25(4), pages 1211-1239, December.

    More about this item

    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:eee:aosoci:v:20:y:1995:i:5:p:345-357. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/aos .

    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.