IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v5y1988i1p1-18.html

Auditors' usage of unaudited book values when making presampling audit value estimates

Author

Listed:
  • MICHAEL D. SHIELDS
  • IRA SOLOMON
  • WILLIAM S. WALLER

Abstract

. An important issue in audit judgment research concerns auditors' use of unaudited book values when making judgments in the presampling phase of the audit. This paper presents a rudimentary model of the auditor's belief revision process with respect to unaudited book values from an audit value estimation perspective. An experiment testing some implications of the model is also presented. The model proposes that the auditor should judge the validity of unaudited book values in the circumstances and use them accordingly when making presampling audit value estimates. The experimental results indicated that the subjects (auditors) used available unaudited book values and that the extent of usage varied over accounts. However, the results also indicated some inaccurate presampling validity judgments which led to overweighting of unaudited book values. Résumé. Une question importante qui préoccupe les chercheurs dans le domaine de la formulation de jugements en vérification a trait à l'utilisation par les vérificateurs de valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans la formulation de jugements au cours de la phase de la vérification précédant l'échantillonnage. Les auteurs présentent un modèle rudimentaire du processus de révision des convictions du vérificateur en ce qui a trait aux valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans une perspective d'estimation de la valeur de vérification. Ils font également état d'une expérience destinée à vérifier certaines des conséquences du modèle. Selon le modèle, le vérificateur devrait juger de la validité des valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans les circonstances et les utiliser en conséquence dans la formation d'estimations de la valeur de vérification avant échantillonnage. Les résultats de l'expérience révèlent que les sujets (vérificateurs) utilisent les valeurs comptables non vérifiées disponibles et que l'étendue de cette utilisation varie avec les comptes. Toutefois, les résultats révèlent aussi l'inexactitude de certains jugements relatifs à la validité antérieure à l'échantillonnage, à la suite desquels une importance trop grande a été accordée aux valeurs comptables non vérifiées.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael D. Shields & Ira Solomon & William S. Waller, 1988. "Auditors' usage of unaudited book values when making presampling audit value estimates," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:5:y:1988:i:1:p:1-18
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1988.tb00692.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1988.tb00692.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1988.tb00692.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scott, Wr, 1979. "Scoring Rules For Probabilistic Reporting," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 156-178.
    2. Felix, Wl & Grimlund, Ra, 1977. "Sampling Model For Audit Tests Of Composite Accounts," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 23-41.
    3. Scott, Wr, 1975. "Auditors Loss Functions Implicit In Consumption-Investment Models," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13, pages 98-117.
    4. Gibbins, M, 1984. "Propositions About The Psychology Of Professional Judgment In Public Accounting," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(1), pages 103-125.
    5. Beck, Pj & Solomon, I & Tomassini, La, 1985. "Subjective Prior Probability-Distributions And Audit Risk," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(1), pages 37-56.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mohammad J. Abdolmohammadi & Paul D. Berger, 1986. "A test of the accuracy of probability assessment techniques in auditing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), pages 149-165, September.
    2. Mohammad J. Abdolmohammadi & Paul D. Berger, 1986. "Une expérience sur la précision des techniques d‘évaluation des probabilités en vérification," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), pages 166-183, September.
    3. Cindy Moeckel, 1991. "Two factors affecting an auditor's ability to integrate audit evidence," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 270-292, September.
    4. Odette M. Pinto, 2015. "Effects of Advice on Effectiveness and Efficiency of Tax Planning Tasks," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 307-329, December.
    5. Sadok Mansour, 2007. "Modelisation Du Risque Dans Les Methodologies D'Audit : Apport Des De La Psychometrie," Post-Print halshs-00543217, HAL.
    6. Owhoso, Vincent & Weickgenannt, Andrea, 2009. "Auditors’ self-perceived abilities in conducting domain audits," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 3-21.
    7. Paul Danos & John W. Eichenseher & Doris L. Holt, 1989. "Specialized knowledge and its communication in auditing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 91-109, September.
    8. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3528 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Ulrich Menzefricke & Wally Smieliauskas, 1988. "On sample size allocation in auditing," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 314-336, March.
    10. J.E. Boritz & B.G. Gaber & W.M. Lemon, 1988. "An experimental study of the effects of elicitation methods on review of preliminary audit strategy by external auditors," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(2), pages 392-411, March.
    11. Jean C. Bedard & Babu R. Gopi & B. Vijayalakshmi, 1991. "A multiple criteria model for audit planning decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 293-308, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Rasso, Jason Tyler, 2015. "Construal instructions and professional skepticism in evaluating complex estimates," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 44-55.
    14. Kathryn Kadous & Lisa M. Sedor, 2004. "The Efficacy of Third†Party Consultation in Preventing Managerial Escalation of Commitment: The Role of Mental Representations," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 55-82, March.
    15. Giora Moore & William R. Scott, 1989. "Auditors' legal liability, collusion with management, and investors' loss," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 754-774, March.
    16. Johnson, Eric N., 1995. "Effects of information order, group assistance, and experience on auditors' sequential belief revision," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 137-160, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Jean Bã‰Dard, 1991. "Compétence et qualité des décisions de vérification," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 223-252, September.
    19. Razana Juhaida Johari & Nordayana Sri Ridzoan & Arumega Zarefar, 2019. "The Influence of Work Overload, Time Pressure and Social Influence Pressure on Auditors¡¯ Job Performance," International Journal of Financial Research, International Journal of Financial Research, Sciedu Press, vol. 10(3), pages 88-106, May.
    20. Yongliang Wu & Zihui Li & Min Zhang & Shengbao Zhai, 2023. "Auditor Assignments and Audit Quality," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 33(2), pages 160-187, June.
    21. Craig Emby & Michael Gibbins, 1987. "Good judgment in public accounting: Quality and justification," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), pages 287-313, September.

    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:wly:coacre:v:5:y:1988:i:1:p:1-18. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.