Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research

Trotman, Ken T.; Bauer, Tim; Humphreys, Kerry A.

doi:10.1016/j.aos.2015.09.004

Cited by 118 publications

(99 citation statements)

References 114 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within the context of a task issued by an audit partner, salience of their audit team may encourage auditors to reflect on the vertical nature of their audit team, where auditors are accountable to the audit partner as a quality control mechanism to ensure the appropriateness of an audit opinion (Trotman et al, ). In this case, team identity salience could dampen audit outcomes.…”

Section: Theoretical Overview and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Professional skepticism: The combined effect of partner style and team identity salience

Stevens¹,

Moroney

Webster

2019

Int J Auditing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although essential in the delivery of a high‐quality audit, regulators report their concerns about an apparent lack of professional skepticism exercised by auditors. In an experiment, we use regulatory focus and social identity theories to examine how the style used by a partner (supportive or unsupportive) when allocating a task and team identity salience (high or low) combine to impact skepticism. We find that when team identity salience is high, auditors demonstrate greater skepticism when a partner's style is supportive rather than unsupportive. In additional analysis, we also consider how motivation moderates the effect of partner style and team identity salience on skepticism and retest our hypotheses using a different measure of skepticism. Our results suggest that team identity salience is important when considering the effect of partner style on professional skepticism.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Overview and Hypothesis Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Professional skepticism: The combined effect of partner style and team identity salience

Stevens¹,

Moroney

Webster

2019

Int J Auditing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, we answer calls by regulators and academics to address limitations in the audit review process (Trotman et al. ; PCAOB ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Multitasking on Auditors’ Judgment Quality

Mullis

Hatfield

2018

Contemporary Accting Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditors must frequently multitask in order to complete their work efficiently. However, the potential impact of multitasking on auditors’ judgment quality is poorly understood. Using Ego Depletion Theory and a laboratory experiment, we predict and find that auditors become less able to identify seeded errors after multitasking, and that this effect is most prominent in the identification of conceptual, rather than mechanical, errors. These negative consequences of multitasking are mitigated when auditors are exposed to an intervention based on a theoretical countermeasure of replenishing depleted self‐control resources, in that multitasking auditors identify more seeded errors with the intervention than without. Given that multitasking is a pervasive feature of the current audit environment, these findings have direct implications for audit practice. Beyond identifying multitasking as a cause of impaired performance in auditing, this study's results provide initial evidence that such negative effects can be mitigated, resulting in improved audit quality and, by extension, improved financial statement quality.

show abstract

“…3 In such a situation, partners are concerned that expressing their view may mean 1 Brainstorming guidelines encourage an extensive and wide coverage of potential frauds, and previous audit research has generally not found the quantity of frauds listed to be associated with fraud likelihood assessments (see Trotman, Bauer, and Humphreys [2015] for a summary). 2 SAS No.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Partner Communications of Fraud Likelihood and Skeptical Orientation on Auditors' Professional Skepticism

Harding¹,

Trotman

2016

AUDITING: A Journal of Practice &Amp; Theory

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY:We investigate the effect of partner communication on the level of professional skepticism in auditor judgments and actions within the context of the fraud brainstorming discussion meeting where the partner is of the view that there is a low likelihood of fraud. Across two studies, we examine the effect on professional skepticism of the partner's communication on the likelihood of fraud (making their own view known, making management's view known, or not making any view known) and the skeptical orientation being encouraged (outward orientation toward the veracity of management representations and/or inward toward the fallibility of the auditor's judgment processes). We find that auditors exhibit higher levels of professional skepticism when the partner expresses management's view, rather than their own view or no view, that there is a low likelihood of fraud. We also consider what causes these differences. Emphasizing an inward skeptical orientation was not found to be more effective in encouraging professional skepticism in audit judgments than emphasizing an outward skeptical orientation. Importantly, emphasizing both an inward and outward skeptical orientation was more effective in encouraging professional skepticism in audit actions than emphasizing only an outward orientation.

show abstract

Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research

Cited by 118 publications

References 114 publications

Professional skepticism: The combined effect of partner style and team identity salience

Professional skepticism: The combined effect of partner style and team identity salience

The Effects of Multitasking on Auditors’ Judgment Quality

The Effect of Partner Communications of Fraud Likelihood and Skeptical Orientation on Auditors' Professional Skepticism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About