IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/aosoci/v22y1997i6p573-587.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

The persuasiveness of audit evidence: The case of accounting policy decisions

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Sorin Domnisoru & Sorin Vinatoru, 2008. "The Financial Audit Complexity of The Fixed Assets," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 49-62.
  2. Terence Bu†Peow NG & Hun†Tong Tan, 2007. "Effects of Qualitative Factor Salience, Expressed Client Concern, and Qualitative Materiality Thresholds on Auditors' Audit Adjustment Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(4), pages 1171-1192, December.
  3. Joseph Aharony & Amihud Dotan, 2004. "A Comparative Analysis of Auditor, Manager and Financial Analyst Interpretations of SFAS 5 Disclosure Guidelines," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3‐4), pages 475-504, April.
  4. Aleksandra Wasowska, 2013. "Heurystyki i bledy poznawcze jako zrodlo niepowodzen audytu zewnetrznego (Heuristics and cognitive biases as a reason of external audit failures)," Problemy Zarzadzania, University of Warsaw, Faculty of Management, vol. 11(43), pages 189-202.
  5. Elena DOBRE & Laura BRAD, 2015. "Financial audit – feckless for economic re-launch," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(603), S), pages 151-162, Summer.
  6. Roberts, Michael L., 2010. "Independence, impartiality, and advocacy in client conflicts," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 29-39.
  7. Backof, Ann G. & Bamber, E. Michael & Carpenter, Tina D., 2016. "Do auditor judgment frameworks help in constraining aggressive reporting? Evidence under more precise and less precise accounting standards," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-11.
  8. Perreault, Stephen & Kida, Thomas, 2011. "The relative effectiveness of persuasion tactics in auditor–client negotiations," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 534-547.
  9. Roger Simnett & Ken T. Trotman, 2002. "Research Methods for Examining Independence Issues: Experimental and Economics-of-Auditing Approaches," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 12(28), pages 23-31, November.
  10. Jennifer R. Joe & Scott D. Vandervelde, 2007. "Do Auditor†Provided Nonaudit Services Improve Audit Effectiveness?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 467-487, June.
  11. William D. Brink & Jonathan H. Grenier & Jonathan S. Pyzoha & Andrew Reffett, 2019. "The Effects of Clawbacks on Auditors’ Propensity to Propose Restatements and Risk Assessments," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 313-332, August.
  12. Messier, William F. & Quick, Linda A. & Vandervelde, Scott D., 2014. "The influence of process accountability and accounting standard type on auditor usage of a status quo heuristic," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 59-74.
  13. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
  14. Quick, Reiner & Schmidt, Florian, 2018. "Do audit firm rotation, auditor retention, and joint audits matter? – An experimental investigation of bank directors' and institutional investors' perceptions," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-21.
  15. 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.
  16. Koch, Christopher & Weber, Martin & Wüstemann, Jens, 2007. "Can Auditors Be Independent? - Experimental Evidence," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-59, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
  17. Vakkur, Nicholas V. & McAfee, R. Preston & Kipperman, Fred, 2010. "The unintended effects of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 18-28.
  18. Kimberly K. Moreno & Sudip Bhattacharjee & Duane M. Brandon, 2007. "The Effectiveness of Alternative Training Techniques on Analytical Procedures Performance," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 983-1014, September.
  19. Joseph Aharony & Amihud Dotan, 2004. "A Comparative Analysis of Auditor, Manager and Financial Analyst Interpretations of "SFAS 5" Disclosure Guidelines," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3-4), pages 475-504.
  20. Steven J. Kachelmeier & Ben W. Van Landuyt, 2017. "Prompting the Benefit of the Doubt: The Joint Effect of Auditor‐Client Social Bonds and Measurement Uncertainty on Audit Adjustments," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(4), pages 963-994, September.
  21. Steven Salterio & Ross Denham, 1997. "Accounting Consultation Units: An Organizational Memory Analysis," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 669-691, December.
  22. Steven E. Salterio, 2008. "A Strategy for Dealing with Financial Reporting Fraud: Fewer Mandates, More Auditing," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 111-122, May.
  23. Fatemi, Darius & Hasseldine, John & Hite, Peggy, 2014. "The impact of professional standards on accounting judgments: The role of availability and comparative information," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 26-39.
  24. Libby, Robert & Bloomfield, Robert & Nelson, Mark W., 2002. "Experimental research in financial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 775-810, November.
  25. Ashley A. Austin & Jacqueline S. Hammersley & Michael A. Ricci, 2020. "Improving Auditors' Consideration of Evidence Contradicting Management's Estimate Assumptions†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 696-716, June.
  26. 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.
  27. Yoon Ju Kang & M. David Piercey & Andrew Trotman, 2020. "Does an Audit Judgment Rule Increase or Decrease Auditors' Use of Innovative Audit Procedures?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 297-321, March.
  28. Florin DOBRE & Adriana Florina POPA & Ada Lorena NICULIÞÃ, 2013. "What Exactly Financial Auditors Report Give the Divergence Between Ethics, Social Responsibility and Financial Performance. Is the Audit Profession Still Sustainable?," REVISTA DE MANAGEMENT COMPARAT INTERNATIONAL/REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL COMPARATIVE MANAGEMENT, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 14(1), pages 63-70, March.
  29. 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.
  30. Kohler, Hervé & Pochet, Christine & Gendron, Yves, 2021. "Networks of interpretation: An ethnography of the quest for IFRS consistency in a global accounting firm," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
  31. Anna M. Cianci & James Lloyd Bierstaker, 2009. "The effect of performance feedback and client importance on auditors' self- and public-focused ethical judgments," Managerial Auditing Journal, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 24(5), pages 455-474, May.
  32. repec:agr:journl:v:2(602):y:2015:i:2(602):p:151-162 is not listed on IDEAS
  33. Dierynck, Bart & Kadous, Kathryn & Peters, Christian P. H., 2024. "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.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.