An empirical investigation of the use of analytical review by external auditors

Ian A. M. FRASER, David J. HATHERLY, Zhenpin, Kenny LIN

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

20 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper reports the results of the first comprehensive survey to investigate the use of analytical review (AR) by external auditors in the UK. The research indicates that extent of usage varies significantly according to firm size and with each audit stage. Results suggest that the recent Auditing Standard which mandates the use of AR at both the planning and review stages will raise standards of practice; in particular those of smaller firms. More effective audit comfort, rather than competition between firms, was regarded as the most important factor driving the increased use of AR. Straightforward AR techniques were regarded as cost-effective and were found to dominate. Regression analysis, on the other hand, was regarded as cost ineffective and to require expert knowledge.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)35-47
Number of pages13
JournalBritish Accounting Review
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

External auditor
Empirical investigation
Audit
Mandate
Factors
Regression analysis
Firm size
Expert knowledge
Costs
Small firms
Auditing standards
Planning

Cite this

@article{9dc74970a21544709da147128c465475,
title = "An empirical investigation of the use of analytical review by external auditors",
abstract = "This paper reports the results of the first comprehensive survey to investigate the use of analytical review (AR) by external auditors in the UK. The research indicates that extent of usage varies significantly according to firm size and with each audit stage. Results suggest that the recent Auditing Standard which mandates the use of AR at both the planning and review stages will raise standards of practice; in particular those of smaller firms. More effective audit comfort, rather than competition between firms, was regarded as the most important factor driving the increased use of AR. Straightforward AR techniques were regarded as cost-effective and were found to dominate. Regression analysis, on the other hand, was regarded as cost ineffective and to require expert knowledge.",
author = "FRASER, {Ian A. M.} and HATHERLY, {David J.} and LIN, {Zhenpin, Kenny}",
year = "1997",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1006/bare.1996.0034",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "35--47",
journal = "British Accounting Review",
issn = "0890-8389",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "1",

}

An empirical investigation of the use of analytical review by external auditors. / FRASER, Ian A. M.; HATHERLY, David J.; LIN, Zhenpin, Kenny.

In: British Accounting Review, Vol. 29, No. 1, 01.03.1997, p. 35-47.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

TY - JOUR

T1 - An empirical investigation of the use of analytical review by external auditors

AU - FRASER, Ian A. M.

AU - HATHERLY, David J.

AU - LIN, Zhenpin, Kenny

PY - 1997/3/1

Y1 - 1997/3/1

N2 - This paper reports the results of the first comprehensive survey to investigate the use of analytical review (AR) by external auditors in the UK. The research indicates that extent of usage varies significantly according to firm size and with each audit stage. Results suggest that the recent Auditing Standard which mandates the use of AR at both the planning and review stages will raise standards of practice; in particular those of smaller firms. More effective audit comfort, rather than competition between firms, was regarded as the most important factor driving the increased use of AR. Straightforward AR techniques were regarded as cost-effective and were found to dominate. Regression analysis, on the other hand, was regarded as cost ineffective and to require expert knowledge.

AB - This paper reports the results of the first comprehensive survey to investigate the use of analytical review (AR) by external auditors in the UK. The research indicates that extent of usage varies significantly according to firm size and with each audit stage. Results suggest that the recent Auditing Standard which mandates the use of AR at both the planning and review stages will raise standards of practice; in particular those of smaller firms. More effective audit comfort, rather than competition between firms, was regarded as the most important factor driving the increased use of AR. Straightforward AR techniques were regarded as cost-effective and were found to dominate. Regression analysis, on the other hand, was regarded as cost ineffective and to require expert knowledge.

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/2687

U2 - 10.1006/bare.1996.0034

DO - 10.1006/bare.1996.0034

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 29

SP - 35

EP - 47

JO - British Accounting Review

JF - British Accounting Review

SN - 0890-8389

IS - 1

ER -