Order effects and memory for evidence in individual versus group decision making in auditing

Sequential processing of evidence may lead to recency effect, a potential bias in judgment. The present research seeks to extend the literature on recency effects by assessing the potential moderating influence of team work: whether group decision making moderates the severity of recency effects predicted by Hogarth and Einhorn (1992), and whether group processing influences the accuracy of, and confidence in memory for evidence. Experienced auditors from a Big-6 accounting firm made audit judgments, either individually or as groups. They were randomly assigned to one of two levels of evidence presentation order. After performing the judgment task, participants completed two evidence recognition tests. Consistent with prior findings, recency effects on judgments were observed, but only for individuals. Group judgments or audit reports were not affected by recency. Order effects, however, did not translate into different choices of audit reports, and did not persist in memories of either individuals or groups. As expected, group memory was more accurate than individual memory and groups were more confident than individuals. Overall, confidence in accurate memories was greater than in inaccurate ones. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  J. Dillard,et al.  Evidence order and belief revision in management accounting decisions , 1991 .

[2]  J. Yates,et al.  Primacy Effects in Clinical Judgments of Contingency , 1988, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[3]  Jane Kennedy,et al.  Debiasing Audit Judgment With Accountability - A Framework And Experimental Results , 1993 .

[4]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  And let us not Forget Memory: The Role of Memory Processes and Techniques in the Study of Judgment and Choice , 1995 .

[5]  G. Stephenson,et al.  Social remembering: Quantitative aspects individual and collaborative remembering police officers and students , 1990 .

[6]  Rebecca A. Henry,et al.  Accuracy and confidence in group judgment , 1989 .

[7]  N. Anderson PRIMACY EFFECTS IN PERSONALITY IMPRESSION FORMATION USING A GENERALIZED ORDER EFFECT PARADIGM. , 1965, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Verlin B. Hinsz,et al.  Cognitive and Consensus Processes in Group Recognition Memory Performance , 1990 .

[9]  N. Anderson Foundations of information integration theory , 1981 .

[10]  Robert H. Ashton,et al.  Combining the judgments of experts: How many and which ones? , 1986 .

[11]  Charles H. Schwenk Information, Cognitive Biases, and Commitment to a Course of Action , 1986 .

[12]  Ken T. Trotman,et al.  The review process as a control for differential recall of evidence in auditor judgments , 1993 .

[13]  A. Furnham The Robustness of the Recency Effect: Studies Using Legal Evidence , 1986 .

[14]  T. O. Nelson Metamemory: A Theoretical Framework and New Findings , 1990 .

[15]  Meetings make evidence? An experimental study of collaborative and individual recall of a simulated police interrogation , 1986 .

[16]  J. Bargh,et al.  Social cognition and social perception. , 1987, Annual review of psychology.

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

[18]  T. O. Nelson BASIC programs for computation of the Goodman-Kruskal gamma coefficient , 1986 .

[19]  P M Wortman,et al.  Group decision making by experts: field study of panels evaluating medical technologies. , 1985, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  D. K. Chalmers Repetition and order effects in attitude formation. , 1971 .

[21]  Buck K.W. Pei,et al.  Tax Professionals Belief Revision: The Effects of Information Presentation Sequence, Client Preference, and Domain Experience , 1992 .

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

[23]  Bruce S. Koch,et al.  AUDITOR BELIEF REVISIONS IN A PERFORMANCE AUDITING SETTING: AN APPLICATION OF THE... , 1992 .

[24]  R. A. Carlson,et al.  Diagnostic reasoning with circumstantial evidence , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[25]  Roger K. Blashfield,et al.  Performance of a composite as a function of the number of judges , 1978 .

[26]  William F. Wright,et al.  Expertise and the explanation effect , 1988 .