Auditor analytical review judgement : a performance evaluation

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

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study provides experimental evidence on several important measures for evaluating the performance of auditor judgement in an analytical review (AR) context. The results of the study suggest that UK auditors demonstrated only moderate level of judgement performance, as measured by consensus, consistency, and self-insight. Contrary to what might be expected, the study did not find that auditors from larger firms exhibited relatively greater consensus. In order to identify experience effects the paper employs the 'expertise paradigm' Accounting, Organizations and Society 18 (1993) 425]. Significant experience effects were identified implying that auditor judgement performance might be improved if less straightforward judgements were to be made by more senior auditors than is currently the case. The results of the study may have implications for both the cost structures and staffing policies of audit firms.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)19-34
Number of pages16
JournalBritish Accounting Review
Volume35
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2003

Fingerprint

Performance evaluation
Auditors
Auditor judgment
Paradigm
Expertise
Audit firms
Experimental study
Large firms
Staffing
Cost structure

Keywords

  • Analytical review
  • Auditor judgement
  • Self-insight

Cite this

LIN, Zhenpin, Kenny ; FRASER, Ian A. M. ; HATHERLY, David J. / Auditor analytical review judgement : a performance evaluation. In: British Accounting Review. 2003 ; Vol. 35, No. 1. pp. 19-34.
@article{bb092572a77f407e9580bab89370e085,
title = "Auditor analytical review judgement : a performance evaluation",
abstract = "This study provides experimental evidence on several important measures for evaluating the performance of auditor judgement in an analytical review (AR) context. The results of the study suggest that UK auditors demonstrated only moderate level of judgement performance, as measured by consensus, consistency, and self-insight. Contrary to what might be expected, the study did not find that auditors from larger firms exhibited relatively greater consensus. In order to identify experience effects the paper employs the 'expertise paradigm' Accounting, Organizations and Society 18 (1993) 425]. Significant experience effects were identified implying that auditor judgement performance might be improved if less straightforward judgements were to be made by more senior auditors than is currently the case. The results of the study may have implications for both the cost structures and staffing policies of audit firms.",
keywords = "Analytical review, Auditor judgement, Self-insight",
author = "LIN, {Zhenpin, Kenny} and FRASER, {Ian A. M.} and HATHERLY, {David J.}",
year = "2003",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0890-8389(02)00107-5",
language = "English",
volume = "35",
pages = "19--34",
journal = "British Accounting Review",
issn = "0890-8389",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "1",

}

Auditor analytical review judgement : a performance evaluation. / LIN, Zhenpin, Kenny; FRASER, Ian A. M.; HATHERLY, David J.

In: British Accounting Review, Vol. 35, No. 1, 01.03.2003, p. 19-34.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

TY - JOUR

T1 - Auditor analytical review judgement : a performance evaluation

AU - LIN, Zhenpin, Kenny

AU - FRASER, Ian A. M.

AU - HATHERLY, David J.

PY - 2003/3/1

Y1 - 2003/3/1

N2 - This study provides experimental evidence on several important measures for evaluating the performance of auditor judgement in an analytical review (AR) context. The results of the study suggest that UK auditors demonstrated only moderate level of judgement performance, as measured by consensus, consistency, and self-insight. Contrary to what might be expected, the study did not find that auditors from larger firms exhibited relatively greater consensus. In order to identify experience effects the paper employs the 'expertise paradigm' Accounting, Organizations and Society 18 (1993) 425]. Significant experience effects were identified implying that auditor judgement performance might be improved if less straightforward judgements were to be made by more senior auditors than is currently the case. The results of the study may have implications for both the cost structures and staffing policies of audit firms.

AB - This study provides experimental evidence on several important measures for evaluating the performance of auditor judgement in an analytical review (AR) context. The results of the study suggest that UK auditors demonstrated only moderate level of judgement performance, as measured by consensus, consistency, and self-insight. Contrary to what might be expected, the study did not find that auditors from larger firms exhibited relatively greater consensus. In order to identify experience effects the paper employs the 'expertise paradigm' Accounting, Organizations and Society 18 (1993) 425]. Significant experience effects were identified implying that auditor judgement performance might be improved if less straightforward judgements were to be made by more senior auditors than is currently the case. The results of the study may have implications for both the cost structures and staffing policies of audit firms.

KW - Analytical review

KW - Auditor judgement

KW - Self-insight

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/1967

U2 - 10.1016/S0890-8389(02)00107-5

DO - 10.1016/S0890-8389(02)00107-5

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 35

SP - 19

EP - 34

JO - British Accounting Review

JF - British Accounting Review

SN - 0890-8389

IS - 1

ER -