IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/accper/v13y2014i2p149-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing Students' Technical Knowledge and Case‐Based Reasoning Skills: Three Short Cases in Financial Accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Alecia Nagy
  • Fred Phillips

Abstract

The following three cases require you to identify and evaluate alternative accounting methods that can be applied to independent case scenarios. In the first scenario, you will evaluate alternative accounting methods relating to revenue recognition for a theatrical production. In the second scenario, you will evaluate alternative accounting methods relating to capitalizing or expensing costs associated with renovations at a golf course. In the third scenario, you will evaluate alternative accounting methods relating to capitalizing or expensing the cost of a signing bonus paid to a professional athlete. Résumé Les trois études de cas proposées par les auteurs exigent la recension et l'évaluation des différentes méthodes comptables pouvant être appliquées à des situations n'ayant pas de lien entre elles. Dans la première étude, l'étudiant doit évaluer les différentes méthodes comptables pouvant être appliquées à la comptabilisation des produit des activités ordinaires d'une maison de production. Dans la deuxième étude, l'exercice consiste à évaluer les différentes méthodes comptables applicables à l'inscription à l'actif ou à la passation en charges des coûts associés aux rénovations d'un terrain de golf. Dans la troisième étude, l'étudiant est appelé à évaluer les différentes méthodes comptables pouvant être appliquées à l'inscription à l'actif ou à la passation en charges du coût d'une prime d'engagement versée à un athlète professionnel.

Suggested Citation

  • Alecia Nagy & Fred Phillips, 2014. "Developing Students' Technical Knowledge and Case‐Based Reasoning Skills: Three Short Cases in Financial Accounting," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(2), pages 149-158, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:13:y:2014:i:2:p:149-158
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3838.12027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12027
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3838.12027?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. Ricchiute, David N., 1999. "The effect of audit seniors' decisions on working paper documentation and on partners' decisions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 155-171, April.
    2. Rich, J. S. & Solomon, I. & Trotman, K. T., 1997. "The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 481-505, July.
    3. Libby, Robert & Trotman, Ken T., 1993. "The review process as a control for differential recall of evidence in auditor judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 559-574, 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. 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.
    2. Michael Gibbins & Ken T. Trotman, 2002. "Audit Review: Managers' Interpersonal Expectations and Conduct of the Review," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 411-444, September.
    3. Sweeney, John T. & Suh, Ik Seon & Dalton, Kenneth C. & Meljem, Sylvia, 2017. "Are workpaper reviews preparer-specific?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 560-577.
    4. Matringe, Nadia & Power, Michael, 2024. "Memories lost: a history of accounting records as forms of projection," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120410, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Griffith, Emily E. & Kadous, Kathryn & Proell, Chad A., 2020. "Friends in low places: How peer advice and expected leadership feedback affect staff auditors’ willingness to speak up," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    6. Ricchiute, David N., 1999. "The effect of audit seniors' decisions on working paper documentation and on partners' decisions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 155-171, April.
    7. Hurley, Patrick J., 2015. "Ego depletion: Applications and implications for auditing research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 47-76.
    8. Peecher, Mark E. & Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2013. "An accountability framework for financial statement auditors and related research questions," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 596-620.
    9. Yip-Ow, Jackson & Tan, Hun-Tong, 2000. "Effects of the preparer's justification on the reviewer's hypothesis generation and judgment in analytical procedures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 203-215, February.
    10. Dierynck, Bart & Kadous, Kathryn & Peters, Christian P. H., 2023. "Learning in the auditing profession: A framework and future directions," Other publications TiSEM eb74c8e4-bc4a-4b71-b88a-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Solomon, Ira & Trotman, Ken T., 2003. "Experimental judgment and decision research in auditing: the first 25 years of AOS," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 395-412, May.
    12. Matringe, Nadia & Power, Michael, 2024. "Memories lost: A history of accounting records as forms of projection," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    13. E. Michael Bamber & Robert J. Ramsay, 1997. "An Investigation of the Effects of Specialization in Audit Workpaper Review," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, September.
    14. Luippold, Benjamin L. & Kida, Thomas & Piercey, M. David & Smith, James F., 2015. "Managing audits to manage earnings: The impact of diversions on an auditor’s detection of earnings management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 39-54.
    15. Kuselias, Stephen & Agoglia, Christopher P. & Wang, Elaine Ying, 2023. "The effect of team member proximity and assignment length on audit staff reliance on a supervisor's preferences," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    16. Fanning, Kirsten & David Piercey, M., 2014. "Internal auditors’ use of interpersonal likability, arguments, and accounting information in a corporate governance setting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 575-589.
    17. Guangming Gong & Liang Xiao & Si Xu & Xun Gong, 2019. "Do Bond Investors Care About Engagement Auditors’ Negative Experiences? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(3), pages 779-806, September.
    18. Hurley, Patrick J., 2019. "Ego depletion and auditors’ JDM quality," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Holger Kraft & Eduardo Schwartz, 2015. "Cash Flow Multipliers and Optimal Investment Decisions," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 21(3), pages 399-429, June.
    20. Desai, Vikram & Bucaro, Anthony C. & Kim, Joung W. & Srivastava, Rajendra & Desai, Renu, 2023. "Toward a better expert system for auditor going concern opinions using Bayesian network inflation factors," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:accper:v:13:y:2014:i:2:p:149-158. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3838 .

    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.