Date of Award

1-1-1997

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy

Faculty

Faculty of Business

First Advisor

Gary Monroe

Second Advisor

Geoff Soutar

Abstract

This study examined three methods of improving audit judgment, namely inoculation, the group process, and counter explanation. Prior research found that auditors' judgments were not always optimum. An important question this study asked was whether the use of inoculation, the group process and counter explanation leads to more effective judgments. In Experiment One, I proposed that inoculation will reduce the effect of framing so that participants exposed to the inoculation treatment will not display a framing effect, while participants not exposed to the treatment will. In addition, I hypothesised that the relation between audit experience and responsiveness to training has an inverted-U shaped value function. The results showed this to be the case. No interaction effect between framing and inoculation was observed, but the order of writing supporting and opposing arguments as required by the inoculation treatment led to a primacy effect. The second experiment posited that the use of audit groups will improve individual auditors' judgments in a going-concern evaluation task. The results showed that not only were audit group judgments more conservative, but consensus was also higher among audit group judgments

Included in

Accounting Commons

Share

 
COinS