IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Paradox of Meaning in Audit Judgement

  • George Mickhail
Registered author(s):

    This paper attempts to provide an approach to understand, not just describe, the judgement process in auditing. It will make some general criticisms of currently established judgement methods from the view point that without an adequate understanding of underlying social interactions, efforts oriented towards judgement formulation will continue to be unrewarding. It will present an alternative judgement strategy capable of simplifying the interface between the auditor and the social system on the basis of a richer cognitive approach. One aspect of this approach will be applied to an example and its specific human factors aspect will be discussed. Finally, I shall sum up with some conclusions and some further research suggestions.

    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: no

    Paper provided by Laboratoire Orléanais de Gestion - université d'Orléans in its series Working Papers with number 2000-6.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 2000
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:log:wpaper:2000-6
    Contact details of provider: Postal: (+33)02 38 41 70 31
    Phone: (+33)02 38 41 70 31
    Fax: (+33)02 38 41 73 60
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    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:log:wpaper:2000-6. 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: (Philippe Paquet)

    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.