An examination of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model and alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing

Autor:	Robert J. Ramsay, Richard M. Tubbs, E. Michael Bamber
Rok vydání:	1997
Předmět:	Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management Information Systems and Management Sociology and Political Science Accounting Descriptive validity Context (language use) Audit Psychology Social psychology
Zdroj:	Accounting, Organizations and Society. 22:249-268
ISSN:	0361-3682
DOI:	10.1016/s0361-3682(96)00029-3
Popis:	While the academic and professional auditing literature makes numerous references to auditors' attitudes to evidence, alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing have not been systematically examined. This study uses the belief-adjustment model developed by Hogarth and Einhorn (1992) as a framework for examining auditors' attitudes to evidence. The study presents a comprehensive analysis of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model in the auditing context. Once the descriptive validity of the Hogarth and Einhorn model is established, parameter estimation in the model permits the investigation of alternative attitudes to evidence in an explicit fashion. The results suggest that in the evaluation of evidence auditors are confirmation prone in that they are more sensitive to evidence that confirms the initial hypothesis. Furthermore, confirmation proneness holds over two experience levels and over contexts that do and do not involve irregularities.
Databáze:	OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz:	https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::fe01e8ab0c8165400ca3ff0309996274 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0361-3682(96)00029-3 Zobrazit plný text záznamu Full Text from ScienceDirect