Consideration of the social context of auditors’ reliance on expert system output during evaluation of loan loss reserves

Auditors are accountable for judgments made within the social context of the accounting firm. Tetlock (1985) states that decision makers often use the acceptability heuristic to cope with accountability. According to this heuristic, individuals make decisions which they are reasonably confident will be acceptable by others to whom they are accountable. When auditors form judgments with the aid of expert system output, they must determine the appropriate level of reliance on the expert system output. Since the expert system output is based on the input of experts, auditors may decide the output is ‘acceptable‘ and overrely on the output. In addition, because of the conservative nature of the accounting firm, expert system output which is negative may be viewed as more acceptable than positive output leading to greater overreliance. The results indicate that auditors do overrely on expert system output and rely to a greater degree on output which is negative versus output which is positive. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Amelia A. Baldwin-Morgan,et al.  A matrix model of expert systems impacts , 1995 .

[2]  Carol E. Brown Expert systems in public accounting: Current practice and future directions , 1991 .

[3]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Knee-deep in the Big Muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. , 1976 .

[4]  David S. Murphy,et al.  Auditor evidence evaluation: Expert systems as credible sources , 1996, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[5]  George P. Huber,et al.  A theory of the effects of advanced information technologies on organizational design, intelligence , 1990 .

[6]  Mohammad J. Abdolmohammadi,et al.  Decision Support and Expert Systems in Auditing: A Review and Research Directions , 1987 .

[7]  D. Campbell Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. , 1957, Psychological bulletin.

[8]  Janet Trewin,et al.  The Impact of the Introduction of an Expert System on a Public Accounting Organization , 1996, Intell. Syst. Account. Finance Manag..

[9]  Michael Gibbins,et al.  Good judgment in public accounting: Quality and justification* , 1987 .

[10]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Order effects in belief updating: The belief-adjustment model , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Ken T. Trotman,et al.  THE EFFECT OF HYPOTHESIS FRAMING: PRIOR EXPECTATIONS AND CUE DIAGNOSTICITY ON AUDITORS'... , 1989 .

[12]  Thomas Kida,et al.  The Impact of Hypothesis-Testing Strategies on Auditors' Use of Judgment Data , 1984 .

[13]  S. Sutton,et al.  An Analysis of Potential Legal Liability Incurred Through Audit Expert Systems , 1995 .

[14]  Robert H. Ashton,et al.  Pressure And Performance In Accounting Decision Settings - Paradoxical Effects Of Incentives, Feedback, And Justification , 1990 .

[15]  Bonnie M. Muir,et al.  Trust Between Humans and Machines, and the Design of Decision Aids , 1987, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[16]  Thomas Kida,et al.  Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. , 1991 .

[17]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[18]  P. Blau Exchange and Power in Social Life , 1964 .