IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v46y2000i1p13-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predecisional Distortion of Information by Auditors and Salespersons

Author

Listed:
  • J. Edward Russo

    (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

  • Margaret G. Meloy

    (Department of Marketing, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0236)

  • T. Jeffrey Wilks

    (Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853)

Abstract

As people are deciding between two alternatives, they may distort new information to support whichever alternative is tentatively preferred. The presence of such predecisional distortion of information was tested in decisions made by two groups of professionals, auditors and salespersons. Both groups exhibited substantial distortion of information, with little reduction for professional decisions compared to nonprofessional ones. However, auditors' distortion was significantly smaller than that of salespersons. In addition, holding professionals accountable for their decisions, akin to a supervisory review, lowered distortion somewhat for salespersons but not at all for auditors. The latter seemed to act as if they were always being held accountable. Because people seem unaware that they are distorting information, at least at the moment this bias is occurring, they are fully convinced of the soundness of their choices. This may make it difficult for distortion to be detected by decision makers themselves or even by supervisors who cannot completely duplicate their subordinate's knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Edward Russo & Margaret G. Meloy & T. Jeffrey Wilks, 2000. "Predecisional Distortion of Information by Auditors and Salespersons," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(1), pages 13-27, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:46:y:2000:i:1:p:13-27
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.46.1.13.15127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.46.1.13.15127
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.46.1.13.15127?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Hoffman, VB & Patton, JM, 1997. "Accountability, the dilution effect, and conservatism in auditors' fraud judgments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 227-237.
    3. Glover, SM, 1997. "The influence of time pressure and accountability on auditors' processing of nondiagnostic information," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(2), pages 213-226.
    4. Eric J. Johnson & John W. Payne, 1985. "Effort and Accuracy in Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 395-414, April.
    5. Koehler, Jonathan J., 1993. "The Influence of Prior Beliefs on Scientific Judgments of Evidence Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 28-55, October.
    6. Roy M. Poses & Michele Anthony, 1991. "Availability, Wishful Thinking, and Physicians' Diagnostic Judgments for Patients with Suspected Bacteremia," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 11(3), pages 159-168, August.
    7. Russo, J. Edward & Medvec, Victoria Husted & Meloy, Margaret G., 1996. "The Distortion of Information during Decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 102-110, April.
    8. Bockenholt, Ulf & Albert, Dietrich & Aschenbrenner, Michael & Schmalhofer, Franz, 1991. "The effects of attractiveness, dominance, and attribute differences on information acquisition in multiattribute binary choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 258-281, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kurt A. Carlson & Samuel D. Bond, 2006. "Improving Preference Assessment: Limiting the Effect of Context Through Pre-exposure to Attribute Levels," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(3), pages 410-421, March.
    2. Tyszka, Tadeusz, 1998. "Two Pairs of Conflicting Motives in Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 189-211, June.
    3. Yan, Huan & Chang, En-Chung & Chou, Ting-Jui & Tang, Xiaofei, 2015. "The over-categorization effect: How the number of categorizations influences shoppers' perceptions of variety and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 631-638.
    4. Waller, William S. & Zimbelman, Mark F., 2003. "A cognitive footprint in archival data: Generalizing the dilution effect from laboratory to field settings," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 254-268, July.
    5. S. Iglesias-Parro & A. Ortega & E. De la Fuente & I. Martín, 2001. "Context Variables as Cognitive Effort Modulators in Decision Making Using an Alternative-Based Processing Strategy," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 311-323, August.
    6. Raghubir, Priya, 2006. "An information processing review of the subjective value of money and prices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(10-11), pages 1053-1062, October.
    7. Rajni Mala & Parmod Chand, 2015. "Judgment and Decision‐Making Research in Auditing and Accounting: Future Research Implications of Person, Task, and Environment Perspective," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(1), pages 1-50, March.
    8. Fischer, Ilan & Budescu, David V., 2005. "When do those who know more also know more about how much they know? The development of confidence and performance in categorical decision tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 39-53, September.
    9. Heribert Gierl & Tina Großmann, 2008. "Imply-Benefit-Attribute im Bereich häufig gekaufter Konsumgüter," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 355-384, June.
    10. Shana Clor‐Proell & Mark W. Nelson, 2007. "Accounting Standards, Implementation Guidance, and Example‐Based Reasoning," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 699-730, September.
    11. Trotman, Ken T. & Bauer, Tim D. & Humphreys, Kerry A., 2015. "Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 56-72.
    12. Eva Traut-Mattausch & Tobias Greitemeyer & Dieter Frey & Stefan Schulz-Hardt, 2007. "Illusory Price Increases after the Euro Changeover in Germany: An Expectancy-Consistent Bias," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 421-434, December.
    13. Gold-Nöteberg, A.H. & Knechel, W.R. & Wallage, P., 2008. "The Effect of Audit Standards on Fraud Consultation and Auditor Judgment," ERIM Report Series Research in Management 11687, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    14. DeZoort, Todd & Harrison, Paul & Taylor, Mark, 2006. "Accountability and auditors' materiality judgments: The effects of differential pressure strength on conservatism, variability, and effort," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4-5), pages 373-390.
    15. Wedell, Douglas H. & Senter, Stuart M., 1997. "Looking and Weighting in Judgment and Choice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 41-64, April.
    16. Simonson, Itamar & Kivetz, Ran, 2000. "The Effects of Incomplete Information on Consumer Choice," Research Papers 1609, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    17. Dalla Via, Nicola & Perego, Paolo & van Rinsum, Marcel, 2019. "How accountability type influences information search processes and decision quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 79-91.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:2:p:136-149 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. John A. List, 2007. "On the Interpretation of Giving in Dictator Games," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(3), pages 482-493.
    20. H. Henry Cao & Bing Han & David Hirshleifer & Harold H. Zhang, 2011. "Fear of the Unknown: Familiarity and Economic Decisions," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(1), pages 173-206.
    21. Nitin Walia & Mark Srite & Wendy Huddleston, 2016. "Eyeing the web interface: the influence of price, product, and personal involvement," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 297-333, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:46:y:2000:i:1:p:13-27. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.