Preparers’ Control‐Risk Assessments Under Alternative Audit‐Review Processes

Gang (Henry) Wu
{"title":"Preparers’ Control‐Risk Assessments Under Alternative Audit‐Review Processes","authors":"Gang (Henry) Wu","doi":"10.1111/j.1467-629X.2011.00434.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the impact of a decomposed audit‐review process on audit preparers’ control‐risk assessments, taking audit experience into consideration. Using an experiment, it manipulates the audit‐review type (decomposed review versus non‐decomposed review) and preparers’ audit experience level (more experienced versus less experienced). Analysis of data collected from two mid‐tier audit firms supported the author’s predictions. First, working‐paper preparers assessed control risk more accurately in a decomposed than in a non‐decomposed review. Second, less‐experienced auditors benefitted more from a decomposed review than more‐experienced auditors.","PeriodicalId":134477,"journal":{"name":"ARN Wiley-Blackwell Publishers Journals","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ARN Wiley-Blackwell Publishers Journals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-629X.2011.00434.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of a decomposed audit‐review process on audit preparers’ control‐risk assessments, taking audit experience into consideration. Using an experiment, it manipulates the audit‐review type (decomposed review versus non‐decomposed review) and preparers’ audit experience level (more experienced versus less experienced). Analysis of data collected from two mid‐tier audit firms supported the author’s predictions. First, working‐paper preparers assessed control risk more accurately in a decomposed than in a non‐decomposed review. Second, less‐experienced auditors benefitted more from a decomposed review than more‐experienced auditors.
在替代审计-审查程序下编制人的控制-风险评估
本研究考察了分解的审计审查过程对审计编制者控制风险评估的影响,并考虑了审计经验。通过实验,它操纵审计-审查类型(分解审查与非分解审查)和编制者的审计经验水平(经验丰富与经验不足)。从两家中层审计公司收集的数据分析支持了作者的预测。首先,工作文件编写者在分解的综述中比在未分解的综述中更准确地评估了控制风险。第二,经验不足的审核员比经验丰富的审核员从分解审查中获益更多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信