The Elaboration Likelihood Model: A Meta-Theory for Synthesizing Auditor Judgment and Decision Making Research

Abstract

Critics argue that audit research rarely impacts practice and that challenges associated with synthesizing and interpreting research are contributing factors. We propose that using the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) as a meta-theoretical framework can help in understanding the collective findings within auditor judgment and decision-making (JDM) research. Our goal is to demonstrate the utility of the ELM by interpreting the collective results of two samples of studies on client cooperation and auditors’ moods. Our synthesis of the client cooperation studies suggests that cooperation on a current issue affects auditors’ judgments only when auditors lack motivation to think carefully about a given task. In contrast, a history of client cooperation tends to bias even highly motivated auditors’ judgments. Our synthesis of the mood studies suggests that motivational interventions are necessary, but not sufficient, to mitigate the effects of mood on judgments. Our ELM interpretation of these studies offers a theoretical explanation for seemingly unrelated predictions and findings that can inform future research and practice.