Research Methods for Examining Independence Issues: Experimental and Economics-of-Auditing Approaches

Recent corporate failures in Australia and overseas have led many to question both the perceived and actual independence of auditors. We believe that it is unlikely that there is a general lack of independence among auditors or, at the other extreme, that there have been no breaches of independence. We suggest the need for research on factors that affect lack of actual independence. Research is also required on what factors affect independence as perceived by users of accounting reports. This paper outlines the research methods issues in the design of such studies.     

The effect of latency variables on repeated measures inference applied to the measurement of risk-taking as a function of psychopathy

In numerous psychology studies, subjects are asked to perform some task a number of times, T. The effect of the choice of T on the associated inference, however, is usually not assessed. We investigate the appropriate choice of T empirically by using data collected in a study on the relationship between psychopathy and risk-taking in 90 inner city drug users enrolled in a residential treatment program. We show that, when studying this relationship, the latency variable usually discarded from the analysis behaves exponentially allowing a natural division of the study period 1, . . . , T into two distinct subperiods. These subperiods yield significantly different results—in the early period only (which we call “reactive”), subjects with high psychopathy scores exhibit lower sensitivity to reward and punishment in our risk taking experiment. The later period (which we call “stable”) shows no relationship between sensitivity to reward and punishment and psychopathic tendencies.     

The impact of the review process in hypothesis generation tasks

This paper examines the performance of auditors in generating hypotheses in an analytical review case both prior to and after review. It partitions two possible sources of gain from the review process, namely the discussion effect and the rank effect. The discussion effect compares review groups with and without discussion. The rank effect compares seniors and audit managers. The study found that the review process results in more plausible hypotheses being generated. Discussion within the review process between reviewer and reviewee was found to be one source of gain from the review process. While there was no difference in the performance of the senior and manager reviewers, managers completed the task in less time.     

Effects of Feedback and Task Predictability onTask Learning and Judgment Accuracy

This study examines the effect of different types of feedback on task learning and judgment accuracy across different levels of task predictability. The results of a laboratory study show that outcome feedback, alone, and in combination with task properties feedback, promotes judgment accuracy for both high and medium levels of task predictability. The beneficial impact of outcome feedback resulted from learning effects. Specifically , the outcome feedback improved judgment accuracy because of improved task knowledge and, in contrast to previous psychology research, it did not cause a deterioration in judgment consistency where task predictability was less than perfect. The results suggest that the negative effects of outcome feedback on judgment accuracy found in the psychology literature, where task predictability is less than perfect, may be limited in accounting settings where judges have experience with the task.     

The comparative effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing professional scepticism

Responding to concerns about insufficient professional scepticism in audits (e.g. PCAOB, 2011 , 2012 ; ASIC, 2012 ), we investigate the effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing the level of professional scepticism and the differences in effects across audit experience levels. In our experiment, we manipulate the type of accountability (outcome versus process) for both novice auditors and audit seniors. We examine the effect on four measures of professional scepticism and find that auditors show greater levels of professional scepticism when they are expected to justify their judgment process, rather than their final judgments. Our results also show that the professional scepticism of novice auditors improves to a greater extent than that of more experienced auditors (audit seniors) under process accountability.     

Associations between social responsibility disclosure and characteristics of companies

Surveys have shown a trend of increased corporate disclosure of social responsibility information. This paper suggests some reasons why companies provide social responsibility information and examines the effects of four variables (size, systematic risk, social constraints and management decision horizon) on the social responsibility disclosure practices of Australian companies.     

The review process as a control for differential recall of evidence in auditor judgments

This experiment examines whether there are systematic offsetting differences in the manner in which initial decision makers and reviewers attend to information which ensure that evidence inconsistent with initial judgments is given adequate consideration. Differences in attention are proposed, which result in differential recall of evidence by the initial decision maker and reviewer and thus influence what knowledge initial decision makers and reviewers bring to their discussions and subsequent decisions. The results suggest that the review process can act as an effective control by increasing the chances that the implications of inconsistent evidence are considered.     

Does an Audit Judgment Rule Increase or Decrease Auditors' Use of Innovative Audit Procedures?

The current audit environment encourages auditors to conduct defensive auditing procedures in lieu of using new, innovative, and potentially more effective audit procedures, due to concerns these procedures may be second-guessed in litigation or by audit inspectors such as the PCAOB. As a result, auditors may prefer traditional “generally accepted” procedures over innovative procedures that are potentially more effective. We test recent proposals that an Audit Judgment Rule (AJR) encourages the use of innovative, and potentially more effective, audit procedures analogous to the similar Business Judgment Rule that affords legal protections to corporate directors. Under an AJR, litigators or audit inspectors could not second-guess auditor judgments, even if they perceive that alternate judgments would have ordinarily been reached, provided the auditor's judgment was made in good faith and in a rigorous manner. However, the AJR's requirements that auditors must defend the rigor of their innovative judgments could potentially backfire and lead auditors to select more traditional procedures. Under the framework of goal activation theory, we conduct an experiment with audit managers and seniors and find that an AJR makes auditors less likely to select innovative audit procedures, particularly when audit risk is high. They do so despite believing the innovative procedures to be more effective than the traditional procedures. Findings from a supplementary experiment with experienced auditors further suggest that national office affirmation of the reasonableness of the procedures does not help overcome this effect. Overall, our findings suggest that an AJR may have the unintended consequence of further increasing auditors' focus on more traditional, and potentially less effective, audit procedures.     

Factors affecting the audit of revalued non-current assets: Initial public offerings and source reliability

This study examines the impact of a proposal to issue shares to the public and the competence of the independent valuer on auditor judgments concerning asset revaluations. A 2 times 2 between-subjects design was used. Four classes of assets were revalued by a hypothetical port company and subjects were asked to assess the planned audit hours and the likelihood that they would accept the valuations as reasonable. Results indicated that auditors would plan to spend longer on the audit of revalued assets when the client proposed to make a share issue and also when the competence of the valuer was lower. They were also less likely to accept the valuations as reasonable in these cases. However, the results suggested that concern with some aspects of the valuation can override sensitivity to the competence of the valuer.     

Mind the Gap: Why Do Experts Have Differences of Opinion Regarding the Sufficiency of Audit Evidence Supporting Complex Fair Value Measurements?

Reported deficiencies continue to persist in audits of fair value measurements and other complex accounting estimates (hereafter, “FVMs”), despite improvements in auditor performance observed by regulators. The persistence of reported deficiencies in audits of FVMs suggests that factors underlying this trend may be more complicated and multidimensional than previously suggested by regulators and academic research, which has focused largely on auditors' unsatisfactory performance as the principal source of reported deficiencies. Drawing from the judgment and decision‐making expertise literature, we gather field‐based data from audit experts to identify additional factors that are likely to be contributing to differences of opinion between audit and inspection experts and the persistence of reported deficiencies in audits of FVMs. We find evidence that audit experts interpret standards and evaluate audit evidence differently than inspectors, and thus perceive there to be a gap between what auditors and inspectors regard as sufficient appropriate audit evidence to support audits of FVMs (hereafter, “FVM gap”). Moreover, results highlight several areas in audits of FVMs where differences of opinion exist between auditor and inspector experts regarding what constitutes a reported deficiency. Within the contexts we examine, our results identify additional factors, beyond deficient auditor performance, that may contribute to the FVM gap. We also report audit partners' recommendations for ways to reduce the FVM gap and suggest avenues for future research. Gaining a more complete understanding of sources contributing to reported deficiencies will help regulators, standard setters, audit firms, and academics to identify ways to reduce the FVM gap and reported deficiencies in audits of FVMs.