A recent research paper investigates how experienced
auditors recognize and respond to the degree of management’s evidentiary
support and the level of estimate uncertainty when assessing management
estimates. Drawing on information processing research, the paper predicts that auditors
can be more comfortable with management estimates, and expect a lower
adjustment, when there is alignment between the degree of estimate uncertainty
and management’s evidentiary support (that is, high uncertainty and more
support or low uncertainty and less support). The following diagram provides a
graphical representation of the theoretical predictions.
This prediction is tested using an experiment where
experienced auditors evaluate an uncertain warranty estimate. The level of
uncertainty is manipulated by varying the range of potential costs as either
two-times or eight-times materiality. The degree of management’s evidentiary
support is manipulated by management either obtaining industry information, inquiring
of technicians, or doing these two plus reviewing records, and performing field
inspections.
The results support the prediction. In the higher
uncertainty condition, auditors were more comfortable and expected a lower
adjustment when management obtained more evidential support, but in the lower
uncertainty condition auditors were more comfortable and expected a lower
adjustment when management obtained less evidential support. In fact, the
alignment between estimate uncertainty and management’s evidentiary support can
make auditors more comfortable with management estimates supported by
relatively less evidence.
These findings demonstrate how audit risk factors, such as
the level of uncertainty and degree of management’s support can interact and
cause auditors to more readily accept less supported financial statement
estimates. More broadly, these findings reveal how providing more information
can actually make recipients more uncomfortable with a proposition.
For more information, refer to the 93-page Dissertation, “Auditor
Judgment Under Uncertainty” by Stephen P. Rowe, submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Accountancy in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 2013. The Doctoral Committee included: Professor Mark
Peecher, Chair; Assistant Professor
Bradley Pomeroy; Professor
Ken Trotman, University of New South Wales; and Professor Michel
Regenwetter.