Abstract
This paper extends previous research on auditors' choice of information cues by considering whether confirmatory strategies are more evident in auditing contexts in which judgments are made sequentially and by examining the effect of providing cue diagnosticity on information choice. Consistent with previous research, there was only weak support for the confirmatory bias as it was dominated by the consistent selection of more failure than viable cues. The comparative preferences for failure compared to viable cues was affected by hypothesis framing when prior information (ratios) indicated nonfailure, but not when prior information indicated failure. The study also found that the comparative number of failure to viable cues chosen is less for subjects given information on cue diagnosticity than for subjects not given this information.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
