Affiliation:
1. North Carolina State University
2. DePaul University
3. University of Missouri–Kansas City
Abstract
ABSTRACT
This study explores two potential safeguards against liability when auditors exercise professional skepticism, but do not detect a fraud: (1) a firm policy requiring a specific level of professional skepticism in high-risk audit areas, and (2) providing jurors with key differences between the role of a fraud examiner and the role of an auditor as a reference point for judging the auditor's performance. We find that describing a specific firm policy to jurors does not significantly decrease negligence findings for auditors who do not detect a fraud. However, providing the role of a fraud examiner as a reference point (e.g., scope of work, testing approaches) does significantly decrease negligence findings. Encouragingly, we also find some evidence that jurors are apt to decrease negligence findings when auditors exercise higher skepticism, but ultimately do not detect a fraud.
Data Availability: Contact the authors.
Publisher
American Accounting Association
Subject
General Medicine,Cell Biology,Developmental Biology,Embryology,Anatomy
Reference36 articles.
1. Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession.
2008.
Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Available at: https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/documents/final-report.pdf
2. Alicke,
M. D.
2000.
Culpable control and the psychology of blame.
Psychological Bulletin126 (
4):
556–
574.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.4.556
3. Backof,
A. G.
2015.
The impact of audit evidence documentation on jurors' negligence verdicts and damage awards.
The Accounting Review90 (
6):
2177–
2204.
https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-51072
4. Backof,
A.G.,
Bowlin
K.,
and
GoodsonB.
2019.
The importance of clarification of auditors' responsibilities under the new audit reporting standards.
Working paper, University of Virginia, The University of Mississippi, and Clemson University.
5. Bailey,
K. E.
III,
Bylinski
J. H.,
and
ShieldsM. D.
1983.
Effects of audit report wording changes on the perceived message.
Journal of Accounting Research21 (
2):
355–
370.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2490779