IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v8y1991i1p198-222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expertise and Its Relation to Audit Decision Quality

Author

Listed:
  • JEAN BÉDARD

Abstract

. This research study examines the effect of expertise on the quality of audit decision making in an audit planning context. Unlike previous studies, expertise is measured in terms of domain†specific knowledge. The quality of audit decision making is evaluated with three measures: consistency with professional standards, consistency with the firm's standards, and consensus among auditors. In general, findings indicate that the quality of audit decision making, as defined in this study, is better among experts than among novices. More specifically, it appears that both experts and novices possess some minimum level of knowledge to be consistent with professional standards. Second, experts are more consistent with firms' standards for both reliance and substantive decisions, indicating that expert auditors may have finer knowledge than novices. Finally, the experts' consensus level is higher than the novices' consensus level for standard auditing situations although for less standard situations, the consensus level is lower for experts.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean Bã‰Dard, 1991. "Expertise and Its Relation to Audit Decision Quality," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 198-222, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:8:y:1991:i:1:p:198-222
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1991.tb00842.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1991.tb00842.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1991.tb00842.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. Joyce, Ej, 1976. "Expert Judgment In Audit Program Planning," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14, pages 29-60.
    2. Gaumnitz, Br & Nunamaker, Tr & Surdick, Jj & Thomas, Mf, 1982. "Auditor Consensus In Internal Control Evaluation And Audit Program-Planning," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 745-755.
    3. Nanni, Alfred Jr., 1984. "An exploration of the mediating effects of auditor experience and position in internal accounting control evaluation," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 149-163, June.
    4. Frederick, Dm & Libby, R, 1986. "Expertise And Auditors Judgments Of Conjunctive Events," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(2), pages 270-290.
    5. Gibbins, M, 1984. "Propositions About The Psychology Of Professional Judgment In Public Accounting," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(1), pages 103-125.
    6. Weber, R, 1980. "Some Characteristics Of The Free-Recall Of Computer Controls By Edp Auditors," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 214-241.
    7. Hamilton, Re & Wright, Wf, 1982. "Internal Control Judgments And Effects Of Experience - Replications And Extensions," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(2), pages 756-765.
    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. Jean Bã‰Dard, 1991. "Compétence et qualité des décisions de vérification," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 223-252, September.
    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. Sadok Mansour, 2007. "Modelisation Du Risque Dans Les Methodologies D'Audit : Apport Des De La Psychometrie," Post-Print halshs-00543217, HAL.
    4. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3528 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. E. Michael Bamber & Joseph H. Bylinski, 1987. "The effects of the planning memorandum, time pressure and individual auditor characteristics on audit managers' review time judgments," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), pages 127-143, September.
    6. W. Robert Knechel & William F. Messier, 1990. "Sequential auditor decision making: Information search and evidence evaluation," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 386-406, March.
    7. Dean A. Shepherd & Dawn R. DeTienne, 2005. "Prior Knowledge, Potential Financial Reward, and Opportunity Identification," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(1), pages 91-112, January.
    8. Shepherd, Dean A. & Zacharakis, Andrew, 2002. "Venture capitalists' expertise: A call for research into decision aids and cognitive feedback," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-20, January.
    9. Jefim Efrim Boritz, 1985. "The effect of information presentation structures on audit planning and review judgments," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(2), pages 193-218, March.
    10. Owhoso, Vincent & Weickgenannt, Andrea, 2009. "Auditors’ self-perceived abilities in conducting domain audits," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 3-21.
    11. 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.
    12. Shepherd, Dean A. & Zacharakis, Andrew & Baron, Robert A., 2003. "VCs' decision processes: Evidence suggesting more experience may not always be better," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 381-401, May.
    13. 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.
    14. Simnett, Roger, 1996. "The effect of information selection, information processing and task complexity on predictive accuracy of auditors," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(7-8), pages 699-719.
    15. Brown, Lawrence D., 1996. "Influential accounting articles, individuals, Ph.D. granting institutions and faculties: A citational analysis," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(7-8), pages 723-754.
    16. Sarah Bonner, 1991. "Is experience necessary in cue measurement? The case of auditing tasks," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(1), pages 253-269, September.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Christoph Huber & Christian König-Kersting, 2022. "Experimenting with Financial Professionals," Working Papers 2022-07, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. Sezen Uludag, 2016. "The importance of control environment in an organization for an independent auditor to determine nature,timing, and extent of substantive tests: An application in Turkey," Journal of Administrative and Business Studies, Professor Dr. Usman Raja, vol. 2(6), pages 294-303.
    21. Sierra-García, Laura & Gambetta, Nicolás & García-Benau, María A. & Orta-Pérez, Manuel, 2019. "Understanding the determinants of the magnitude of entity-level risk and account-level risk key audit matters: The case of the United Kingdom," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 227-240.

    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:8:y:1991:i:1:p:198-222. 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.