The Influence of Inspection Focus on Auditor Judgments in Audits of Complex Estimates

Tegeler, Amy C.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2941662

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We expect a negative relationship between professional scepticism and participants’ estimate of the probability that the receivable was fully collectible (i.e., selecting a lower probability offered evidence of greater professional scepticism). These expectations are consistent with Nelson (2009) and Hurtt (2010), who explain that researchers consider an auditor to be more sceptical when the auditor doubts the accuracy of managements’ estimates because of the lack of more persuasive evidence (Tegeler, 2018).…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…In contrast to the aforementioned studies, our research does not rely on psychology‐based interventions and judgment frameworks (see also Tegeler, 2018); rather, our study investigates how the type of thinking required for the performance of an unrelated prior task affects auditors’ professional scepticism during a subsequent task. Thus, while Backof et al (2016, p. 10) conclude that ‘it is critical to consider the audit task at hand when determining how best to restructure a given audit task to induce the most beneficial “level” of thinking on the continuum from concrete, low‐level details to abstract, high‐level essences’, our study indicates that consideration of preceding tasks is similarly important.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is important to note that the aforementioned studies relied on psychology‐based interventions and judgment frameworks (see Tegeler, 2018) designed to induce an abstract or concrete mindset orientation. In essence, the interventions and judgment frameworks contain features that psychology research has shown to be effective in switching mindsets.…”

Section: Literature Review and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Can multitasking influence professional scepticism?

Fehrenbacher

Triki

Weisner

2020

Accounting & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivated by concerns about the adverse effects of multitasking in audit practice and research that highlights the effects of mindset orientation on professional scepticism, we investigate how the performance of tasks consistent with different mindset orientations affects auditors’ professional scepticism in a subsequent, unrelated task. Results show that auditors who first complete a task that requires concrete (abstract) thinking display greater professional scepticism during a subsequent, unrelated task that involves evaluating a narrow and complete set of evidence (a broad and incomplete set of evidence). We discuss the implications for professional scepticism in multitasking environments.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Review and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Can multitasking influence professional scepticism?

Fehrenbacher

Triki

Weisner

2020

Accounting & Finance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When Do Auditors Use Specialists' Work to Improve Problem Representations of and Judgments about Complex Estimates?

Griffith

2017

The Accounting Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditors are more likely to identify misstatements in complex estimates if they recognize problematic patterns among an estimate's underlying assumptions. Rich problem representations aid pattern recognition, but auditors likely have difficulty developing them given auditors' limited domain-specific expertise in this area. In two experiments, I predict and find that a relational cue in a specialist's work highlighting aggressive assumptions improves auditors' problem representations and subsequent judgments about estimates. However, this improvement only occurs when a situational factor (e.g., risk) increases auditors' epistemic motivation to incorporate the cue into their problem representations. These results suggest that auditors do not always respond to cues in specialists' work. More generally, this study highlights the role of situational factors in increasing auditors' epistemic motivation to develop rich problem representations, which contribute to high-quality audit judgments in this and other domains where pattern recognition is important.

show abstract

The Influence of Inspection Focus on Auditor Judgments in Audits of Complex Estimates

Cited by 2 publications

References 50 publications

Can multitasking influence professional scepticism?

Can multitasking influence professional scepticism?

When Do Auditors Use Specialists' Work to Improve Problem Representations of and Judgments about Complex Estimates?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About