IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Ranked set sampling: an auditing application

  • Nader Gemayel


  • Elizabeth Stasny


  • James Tackett


  • Douglas Wolfe


Registered author(s):

    This study compares the statistical precision of simple random sampling with balanced ranked set sampling in an inventory valuation scenario. Computer simulation is used to calculate standard errors for the ranked set sampling mean, and those standard errors are then compared to the corresponding standard error achieved under simple random sampling. Results indicate that required sample sizes for a given precision are much smaller under ranked set sampling than under simple random sampling. This implies that simple random sampling is inferior to ranked set sampling in auditing scenarios involving the measurement of time consuming or difficult to gather data such as inventory observations, receivable confirmations, etc. Accordingly, auditors using ranked set sampling in lieu of simple random sampling can achieve the significant cost reductions associated with smaller sample sizes without sacrificing audit quality. This is a significant finding because current auditing practice is still using the simple random sampling methodology. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Springer in its journal Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting.

    Volume (Year): 39 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 4 (November)
    Pages: 413-422

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:39:y:2012:i:4:p:413-422
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Steven N. MacEachern & Ömer Öztürk & Douglas A. Wolfe & Gregory V. Stark, 2002. "A new ranked set sample estimator of variance," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 64(2), pages 177-188.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:39:y:2012:i:4:p:413-422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla)

    or (Christopher F. Baum)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.