Abstract
ABSTRACT
To avoid problems caused by moderate or weak substantive analytical procedures (SAPs), audit firms tend to focus more on tests of details than SAPs, especially for large income statement accounts such as revenues. Based on findings from previous studies, this commentary study attempts to: (1) summarize the outcomes of SAPs developed by advanced analytics models (e.g., regression and time-series models), and (2) respond to the question of SAP use by evaluating the limitations and benefits if one test replaces the other. The outcomes of prior studies generally show that SAPs developed by advanced analytical models do not provide a high level of assurance for revenue. Since SAPs and audit sampling present different risks and unique benefits, they are often complementary. Without the careful consideration of conditions related to the risks and benefits of each test, simply avoiding SAPs could reduce the effectiveness of substantive tests.
Publisher
American Accounting Association
Subject
Computer Science Applications,Accounting
Reference68 articles.
1. AICPA.
2006.
Audit evidence.
InAUSection 326.New York, NY:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
2. AICPA.
2012
a.
Analytical procedure.
InAU-CSection 520.New York, NY:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
3. AICPA.
2012
b.
Audit sampling.
InAU-CSection 530.New York, NY:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
4. AICPA.
2012
c.
Materiality in planning and performing an audit.
InAU-CSection 320.New York, NY:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
5. Allen,
R. D.,
Beasley
M. S.,
and
BransonB. C.
1999.
Improving analytical procedures: A case of using disaggregate multilocation data.
Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory18 (
2):
128–
142.
https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.1999.18.2.128
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献