Threshold adjustment in response to asymmetric loss functions: The case of auditors' substantial doubt thresholds

Abstract Thresholds play a critical role in linking judgments and choices. One way they do so is by dividing a continuous judgment variable, such as probability, into two regions that imply different choices and actions, such as operate/do not operate, admit/do not admit, or invest/do not invest. We examine this link by focusing on the tendency of professional decision makers to adjust their thresholds when the risks associated with negative decision outcomes are elevated. We report two studies involving experienced auditors that investigate thresholds in a “going-concern” setting. In this setting, the auditor assesses the probability that a business firm will be unable to continue in existence for the coming year; if that probability exceeds a “substantial doubt” threshold (also assessed by the auditor), the auditor is required to disclose the relevant information in the firm’s annual report to the public. Our studies use two experimental cases based on actual business firms that differ in their objective likelihoods of not continuing as going concerns. We derive the auditors’ substantial doubt thresholds from the relationship between their probability assessments and their disclosure choices, unlike all prior research which has simply asked auditors to state the probability they believe represents substantial doubt. We find that auditors’ derived thresholds are adjusted downward for the more problematic firm, a result that we attribute to the asymmetric loss functions inherent in going-concern settings. The second study has some of the auditors directly provide their substantial doubt thresholds (SDTs). The downward adjustment is again found for derived thresholds but not for elicited thresholds, suggesting that the method of capturing thresholds may be an important issue in understanding judgment and choice.

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

[2]  Robert H. Ashton,et al.  Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing: Acknowledgments , 1995 .

[3]  S. Pauker,et al.  The Utility of Thresholds and the Threshold Utility , 1987, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[4]  Lola L. Lopes,et al.  [Advances in Experimental Social Psychology] Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 20 Volume 20 || Between Hope and Fear: The Psychology of Risk , 1987 .

[5]  Terry L. Campbell,et al.  THE EFFECTS OF INFORMATION ORDER AND HYPOTHESIS-TESTING STRATEGIES ON AUDITORS' JUDGMENTS. , 1989 .

[6]  S G Pauker,et al.  The toss-up. , 1981, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  J. Hershey,et al.  Derived Thresholds , 1983, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[8]  Robert H. Ashton,et al.  Evidence-responsiveness in professional judgment: Effects of positive versus negative evidence and presentation mode , 1990 .

[9]  L. Beach,et al.  Do ranks suffice? A comparison of alternative weighting approaches in value elicitation , 1995 .

[10]  N. Kerr.  Stochastic models of juror decision making. , 1993 .

[11]  John A. Swets.  The science of choosing the right decision threshold in high-stakes diagnostics. , 1992 .

[12]  J C Hershey,et al.  Clinical Guidelines for Using Two Dichotomous Tests , 1986, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[13]  David E. Bell,et al.  Disappointment in Decision Making Under Uncertainty , 1985, Oper. Res..

[14]  Thomas Kida,et al.  The Impact of Analytical Review Results, Internal Control Reliability, and Experience on Auditors' Use of Analytical Review , 1989 .

[15]  Jere R. Francis,et al.  Accounting Accruals and Auditor Reporting Conservatism , 1999 .

[16]  Jane F. Mutchler,et al.  A MULTIVARIATE-ANALYSIS OF THE AUDITORS GOING-CONCERN OPINION DECISION , 1985 .

[17]  Bryan K. Church,et al.  Default on Debt Obligations and the Issuance of Going-concern Opinions , 1992 .

[18]  A. Baron,et al.  A Method to Describe Physician Decision Thresholds and Its Application in Examining the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease Based on Exercise Treadmill Testing , 1992, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  Marshall B. Romney,et al.  Calibration of auditors' probabilistic judgments: Some empirical evidence , 1982 .

[20]  R. Hastie.  Inside the juror: Algebraic models of juror decision processes , 1993 .

[21]  David E. Bell,et al.  Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty , 1982, Oper. Res..

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

[23]  Sankey V. Williams,et al.  The Single-cutoff Trap , 1989, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[24]  J. Kassirer,et al.  Therapeutic decision making: a cost-benefit analysis. , 1975, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  R. Wigton,et al.  Relation of Physicians' Predicted Probabilities of Pneumonia to Their Utilities for Ordering Chest X-rays to Detect Pneumonia , 1992, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[26]  G. Judge,et al.  The Theory and Practice of Econometrics , 1981 .

[27]  E. Bamber,et al.  Expert Judgment in the Audit Team: A Source Reliability Approach , 1983 .

[28]  W. Beaver.  Financial Ratios As Predictors Of Failure , 1966 .

[29]  M. Zmijewski.  METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES RELATED TO THE ESTIMATION OF FINANCIAL DISTRESS PREDICTION MODELS , 1984 .

[30]  N. Pitts,et al.  The Effect of Varying Diagnostic Thresholds upon Clinical Caries Data for a Low Prevalence Group , 1988, Journal of dental research.

[31]  M. W. Nelson,et al.  The ability of professional standards to mitigate aggressive reporting , 1995 .

[32]  William R. Kinney,et al.  Outcome Information and the "Expectation Gap": The Case of Loss Contingencies , 1996 .

[33]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  Contextual Effects in the Interpretations of Probability Words: Perceived Base Rate and Severity of Events , 1990 .

[34]  W. Hopwood,et al.  A Reexamination of Auditor versus Model Accuracy within the Context of the Going-Concern Opinion Decision* , 1994 .

[35]  R. Sugden,et al.  Regret Theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty Review of Economic Studies , 1982 .

[36]  N. Kerr,et al.  Asymmetric influence in mock jury deliberation: jurors' bias for leniency. , 1988, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[37]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: the mobilization-minimization hypothesis. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[38]  E. Weber.  From Subjective Probabilities to Decision Weights: The Effect of Asymmetric Loss Functions on the Evaluation of Uncertain Outcomes and Events , 1994 .

[39]  S. K. Asare,et al.  The auditors' going concern opinion decision: Interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. , 1989 .

[40]  P. Ellsworth.  Some Steps between Attitudes and Verdicts , 1993 .

[41]  Philippe Delquié,et al.  Stated vs Implicit Willingness to Pay Under Risk , 1995 .

[42]  E. Deakin.  Discriminant Analysis Of Predictors Of Business Failure , 1972 .

[43]  J. Kassirer,et al.  The threshold approach to clinical decision making. , 1980, The New England journal of medicine.

[44]  Robert Sugden,et al.  Disappointment and Dynamic Consistency in Choice under Uncertainty , 1986 .

[45]  R. Centor,et al.  Measures of the Value of a Diagnostic Test Derived from Stochastic Thresholds , 1986, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[46]  Thomas Kida.  AN INVESTIGATION INTO AUDITORS CONTINUITY AND RELATED QUALIFICATION JUDGMENTS , 1980 .

[47]  R. Hastie.  Inside the juror: Models of juror decision making , 1993 .

[48]  Donal E. Carlston,et al.  Negativity and extremity biases in impression formation: A review of explanations. , 1989 .

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