Investigating the Effect of the Order of Providing Information on the Judgment of Auditors Related to Going Concern with Emphasis on Experience and Time Limitation

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate of Accounting, Faculty of Economics, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

2 Associate Professor of Accounting, Faculty of Economics, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran.

10.22103/jak.2023.20115.3762

Abstract

Objective: Cognitive neuroscience studies show that the judgment process and its characteristics are the most basic cognitive activities of the brain that people are forced to perform throughout their lives. In the field of auditing, judgment and decision-making are very important. The auditing process is based on various judgments and decisions. In other words, all the issues raised in the audit are covered by the judgment and decisions of the relevant persons. The judgment process of a person is by the abilities, characteristics and internal character of the person making the judgment, which is different from other persons. However, components such as the process of recognition, the process of judgment, the environment, motivations and other factors related to the person making the judgment decrease quality will be judged. One of the sub-branches of the component of the judgment process is the order of information presented or obtained, which, according to the results of many researches, can affect the quality of people's judgment. The effect of the order of information on the quality of judgment becomes important when the judgment of people who are given information "A" first and then information "B" for processing is compared to the judgment of people who are given information "B" first and then information "B" and then the information given by "A" makes a significant difference in his/her judgment. Experience in the framework of variables related to the person is one component that affects the quality of judgment. The information in people's memories, formed over time and based on various judgments and decisions, will be able to modify future decisions. A person's specialized experience increases his/her abilities in processing information and finding the most appropriate solution in special conditions. Therefore, it is expected that experience can moderate the effect of the order of information presentation on the quality of the auditor's judgment.
 Method: This is a quantitative and cross-sectional study. The statistical population includes all auditors working in the country in 2022. Two questionnaires are sent one month apart to persons with the required characteristics. The difference between the first and second questionnaires is only in the order of information, so all the information of both questionnaires is completely the same.
 Results: The results show that the significance level of the Vicaxon test based on the difference in the average judgment in two stages is less than 1%, so the effect of the order of information presentation on the quality of judgment is confirmed with 99% confidence.
In addition, the results show that experience has a non-linear relationship with the quality of judgment due to the order of information of individuals. In other words, people with an average experience between 10 and 15 years are affected by the information order compared to people with less experience. In addition, in completing the effect of the order of presentation of information, the findings show that when the first information with a negative charge is presented, the person's judgment will be negative. The person's judgment will be positive if the first information presented is positive. Finally, the results indicate a stronger relationship between the information load of the first information and their judgment when the auditors are under time constraints.
 Conclusion: The findings show a significant difference between people's judgments of information whose order is different. The order of presenting information by taking advantage of the cognitive limitations of the human mind is able to affect people's judgment and decisions. In addition, there is a curvilinear relationship between the experience and the difference between the two judgments of the persons in such a way that the least difference of judgment was for the persons who had experienced between 5 and 15 years. This shows that the order of information presentation influences less experienced and more experienced people. The reasoning for this result can be found in the theory of the tendency to evaluate.
Furthermore, when the first information provided is positive, the person's final judgment will also be positive. If the first information provided is negative, the person's final judgment will also be accompanied by a negative sign. These findings show that the order of information influences people and considers a certain weight and coefficient for the first information, so the effect of information precedence is confirmed. This effect is also limited by time. When a person is faced with a time limitation or thinks he does not have enough time to process information, he pays more attention to the first and most prominent information, relies on that information and bases his subsequent judgments on that information.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

وجودی نوبخت، آرمین؛ کردستانی، غلامرضا؛ حقیقت، حمید و دریائی؛ عباسعلی (1400). تأثیر انحراف توجه حسابرسان و ارزش‌های شخصی بر کشف مدیریت سود. پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی، 13(1)، 25-24. https://far.ui.ac.ir/article_25537_ 2172ddc332fedd7a7e04edb5c44da92d.pdf.
کامیابی، یحیی؛ محسنی ملکی رستاقی، بهرام و جوادی نیا، امیر. (1400). تأثیر اطلاعات غیرمالی و اطلاعات گزارشگری یکپارچه بر تصمیم‌گیری: رفتار سرمایه‌گذاری با رویکرد تجربی. مدیریت دارایی و تأمین مالی، 9(2)، 124-99. https://amf.ui.ac.ir/article_26070_ beec11fd13eeae9ea4e565d1ba1b83ae.pdf.
عرب‌آبادی، رحیم؛ بهارمقدم، مهدی و خدامی‌پور، احمد. (1400) سبک شناختی و قضاوت حسابرس: آیا سبک شناختی اثرات تاخیر بر فرایند تعدیل باور حسابرسان را کاهش می‌دهد؟ دانش حسابرسی، ۲۱(۸۴)، 27-5 http://danesh.dmk.ir/article-1-2217-fa.html.
سیرانی، محمد؛ خواجوی، شکراله و نوشادی، میثم. (1388). تأثیر تجربه و پیچیدگی موضوعات حسابرس بر قضاوت حسابرس. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 55(16)، 35-50. https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.26458020.1388.16.2.10.7.
ستوده، مسعود؛ پورحیدری، امید و خدامی پور، احمد. (1402). بررسی تأثیر فشار شغلی حسابرسی بر قضاوت و هنجارهای ذهنی حسابرسان با در نظر گرفتن نقش میانجی‌گری هوش هیجانی و هوش اخلاقی. مجله دانش حسابداری، 14(1)، 50-25 https://jak.uk.ac.ir/article_3326_6e355522a820cf744b4203fc07721f91.pdf.
دشتی‌نژاد، معصومه؛ ایمانی برندق، محمد؛ رستمی وهاب و محمدی، علی. (1402). ارزیابی پیشران‌های لنگر ذهنی سرمایه‌گذاران براساس محدودیت ناشی از ابزارهای مالی مشتقه. مجله دانش حسابداری، 14(2)، 51-25 https://jak.uk.ac.ir/article_3503_ 0f47ec49690b9456710aeda515bfdb9f.pdf.
References
Ahlawat, S. (1999). Order effects and memory for evidence in individual versus group decision making in auditing. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(1), 71-88 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199903)12:1%3C71::AID-BDM308%3E3.0.CO;2-Q.
Almilia, L.S., & Wulanditya, P. (2018). The comparison of investment decision frame and belief-adjustment model on investment decision making. Journal Keuangan dan Perbankan, 22(3), 405-417 https://doi.org/ 10.26905/jkdp.v22i3.1880.
Anderson, B.H., & Maletta, M.J. (1999). Primacy effects and the role of risk in auditor belief-revision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18(1), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=164370.
Arababadi, R., Baharmghaddam, M., & Khodamipour, A. (2021) Cognitive style and auditor judgment: Does cognitive style reduce the effects of delay on auditors' belief adjustment process? Audit knowledge, 21(84), 5-27 http://danesh.dmk.ir/article-1-2217-fa.html [In Persian].
Ashton L.J., Learmont J., Luo, K., Wylie, B., Stewart, G., & Kaldor, J.M. (1994). Infection in recipients of blood products from donors with known duration of infection. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 344, 718-720 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92210-1.
Ashton, A.H., & Ashton, R.H. (1988). A sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review, 63(4), 623-641 https://www.jstor.org/stable/247903.
Bonner, S.E. (1988). Experience effects in the components of analytical risk assessment. Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of Michigan. http://www.jstor.org/stable/247877.
Bonner, S.E. (2008). Judgment and decision making in accounting. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. DOI: 10.4236/ojacct.2022.112010
Bonner, S.E. (1990). Experience effects in auditing: The role of task-specific knowledge. The Accounting Review, 65, 72-92 https://www.jstor.org/stable/247903.
Bruine de Bruin, W., & Keren, G. (2003). Order effects in sequentially judged options due to the direction of comparison. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 92(1-2), 91–101. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0749-5978(03)00080-3
Pei, B.K.W., Reckers, P.M.J., & Wyndelts, R.W. (1990). The influence of information presentation order on professional tax judgment. Journal of Economic Psychology, 11(1), 119–146 doi:10.1016/0167-4870 (90)90050-j.
Butt, J., & Campbell, T.L. (1989). The effects of information order and hypothesis-testing strategies on auditors' judgments. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 4, 471-79 https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12072.
Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 1211-152. 10.1207/s15516709cog0502_2.
Cook, E., & Kelley, T. (1988). Auditor stress and time budgets. CPA Journal, 83-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.sbspro.2016.04.047
Cooper, C.L., & Kelly, M. (1984). Stress among crane operators. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 26, 575-578. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45013678.
Corley, H.W. (1988). Optimality conditions for maximizations of set-valued functions. Journal of Optimization Theory, 58, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00939767.
Cuccia, L.A., Morin F., Beck, A., Hébert, N., Just, G., Lennox, R.B. (2000). Spanning or looping? The order and conformation of bipolar phospholipids in lipid membranes using 2H NMR spectroscopy. Chem.Eur, 6, 4379−4384. DOI: 10.1002/1521-3765(20001201)6:23<4379::aid-chem4379>3.0.co;2-m.
Curley, S.P., Young, M.J., Kingry, M.J. & Yates, J.F. (1988). Primacy effects in clinical judgments of contingency. Medical Decision Making, 8, 216-22 DOI: 10.1177/0272989X8800800310
Cushing, B., & Ahlawat, S. (1996). Mitigation of recency bias in audit judgment: The effect of documentation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 16, 134–146.
Dashtinejad, M., Imani, M., Rostami, V., & Mohammadi, A. (1402). Evaluation of investors' mental anchor drivers based on the limitation caused by derivative financial instruments. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 14(2), 25-51 https://jak.uk.ac.ir/article_3503_ 0f47ec49690b9456710aeda515bfdb9f.pdf [In Persian].
Dillard, J.F. (1991). Accounting as a critical social science. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 4(1), 45-76 https://doi.org/10.1108/09513579110143849.
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring and adjustment heuristic: Why adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17, 311–318 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01704.x.
Esch, M., Schnellbächer, B., & Wald, A. (2019). Does integrated reporting information influence internal decision making? An experimental study of investment behavior. Business Strategy and the Environment, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2267.
Grossman, A.M., & Welker, R.B. (2011). Does the arrangement of audit evidence according to causal connections make auditors more susceptible to memory conjunction errors?, Behavioral Research in Accounting, 23(2), 93–115 https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-10063.
Hadi, M.Z.M., Almilia, L.S., & Nita, R.A. (2019). information presentation pattern, information order and framing effect in taking investment decisions. The Indonesian Journal of Accounting Research, 22(3), 329–358 http:/doi.org/10.33312/ijar.450.
Hellmann, A., Yeow, C., & De Mello, L. (2017). The influence of textual presentation order and graphical presentation on the judgements of non-professional investors. Accounting and Business Research, 47(4), 455–470 DOI: 10.1080/00014788.2016.1271737.
Hogarth, R.M., & Einhorn, H.J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: the belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 1-55. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265301970
Hurtt, R.K. (2010). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1), 149-171 DOI:10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.149.
Kamyabi, Y., Mohseni Maleki Rostaghi, B., & Javadinia, A. (2021). The impact of non-financial information and integrated reporting information on decision-making: Investment behavior with an empirical approach. Asset Management and Financing, 9(2), 124-99 https://amf.ui.ac.ir/article_26070_beec11fd13eeae9ea4e565d1ba 1b83ae.pdf. [In Persian].
Koch, Ch., Kohler, A., & Yankova, K. (2016). Professional skepticism and auditor judgment: Does trait skepticism mitigate the recency bias? papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2880653.
Leloup, L., Meert, G., & Samson, D. (2018). Moral judgments depend on information presentation: evidence for recency and transfer effects. Psychologica Belgica, 58(1),  256–275 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.421.
Libby, R. (1995) The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment. in: R.H. Ashton and A.H Ashton, eds., Judgment and Decision-Making Research in Accounting and Auditing (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY); 176-206 https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159183.
Libby, R., Tan, H.T. (1999). Analysts’ reactions to warnings of negative earnings. Journal of Accounting Research 37(2), 415–436. DOI: 10.2307/2491415.
Maliu, A., Almilia, L.S., & Wulanditya, P. (2020). Belief adjustment model with self-review debiaser presentation patterns on investment decision making. Jornal Keuangan dan Perbankan, 24(3), 375-392 https://doi.org/ 10.26905/jkdp.v24i3.4097
Miller, N.E. (1960). Learning resistance to pain and fear: Effects of overlearning, exposure, and rewarded exposure in context. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(3), 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043321.
Noura Metawa, M., Kabir Hassan, S., & Faisal, M.S. (2019). Impact of behavioral factorson investors’ financial decisions: case of the Egyptian stock market. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 12(1), 30-55 https://doi.org/10.1108/ IMEFM-12-2017-0333.
Pie, J.E. (1999). The pharmacokinetic characteristics of glycolated humanized anti-Tac Fabs are determined by their isoelectric points. Cancer Research, 59, 422–423. doi: 10.1007/s13238-017-0408-4.
Prodanova, N.A., Savina, N.V., Dikikh, V.A., Enina, Y.I., Voronkova, O.Y., & Nosov, V.V. (2020). Features of the coherent presentation of information in order to prepare integrated corporate reporting. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 7(3), 2227-2281 http://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.7.3(54).
Hastie, R., & Dawes, R.M. (2011). Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. Sage Publications, 14(5), 7619-2275.
Rutledge, R. (1995). Does management engage in the manipulation of earnings? The case of SFAS 52. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing & Taxation, 4(1), 69–86 https://doi.org/10.1016/1061-9518(95)90008-X.
Shanteau, J.C. (1970). An additive model for sequential decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 85(2), 181–191 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029552.
 Sirani, M., Khajovi, Sh., & Noshadi, M. (2008). The effect of the experience and complexity of the auditor's issues on the auditor's judgment, Accounting and Auditing Reviews, 55(16), 35-50 https://dorl.net/dor/ 20.1001.1.26458020.1388.16.2.10.7 [In Persian].
Slavic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1971). Comparison of bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 9, 649-744 https://garfield.library.upenn.edu/classics1980/A1980JX53800001.pdf.
Solomon, I., & Brown, C. (1992). Auditors' judgments and decisions under time pressure: An illustration and agenda for research. Proceedings of the 1992 Deloitte & Touche/University of Kansas Symposium on Auditing Problems, 8, 73-98 https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/288070767.pdf.
Sotoudeh, M., Pourheidari, O., & Khodamipour, A. (1402). Examining the impact of auditing job pressure on auditors' judgment and subjective norms, considering the mediating role of emotional intelligence and moral intelligence. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 14(1), 25-50 https://jak.uk.ac.ir/article_3326_6e355522a820 cf744b4203fc07721f91.pdf [In Persian].
Staw, B.M. (1976). Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 16, 27– 44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2.
Staw, B.M., & Ross, J. (1987). Behavior in escalation situations: Antecedents, prototypes and solutions. In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organization behavior: An annual series of essays and critical reviews, 4, 39–78. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Behavior-in-escalation-situations%3A-Antecedents%2C-and-Staw-Ross/0e72d20af53a9b99857b805a6798be0e23764f0f
Tubbs R.M. (1992) The effect of experience on the auditors arganization and amount of knowledge. The Accounting Review, 18, 783-801.
Tubbs, R.M., Gaeth, G.J., Levin, I.P., & Van Osdol, L.A. (1993). Order effects in belief updating with consistent and inconsistent evidence. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 257-269.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1130. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0036-8075%2819740927%293%3A185%3A4157%3C1124% 3AJUU HAB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M
Vojodi Nubakht, A., Kurdestani, Gh., T.H., & Darai; A.A. (2021). The effect of auditors' attention deviation and personal values on the discovery of earnings management. Financial Accounting Research, 13(1), 25-24 https://far.ui.ac.ir/article_25537_2172ddc332fedd7a7e04edb5c44da92d.pdf [In Persian].

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 21 August 2022
  • Revise Date: 14 January 2023
  • Accept Date: 16 January 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics