Are Auditors' Judgments Sufficiently Regressive?
检验审计师在判断中是否使用代表性启发法，导致其判断系统性地偏离贝叶斯最优反应，并探讨这种启发式使用的经济后果。
The primary purpose of this paper is to test for the use of the representativeness heuristic by auditors in situations in which its use will lead to judgments that systematically depart from the Bayesian optimal responses. No explicit representation of payoffs was made, nor were subjects typically asked to choose a course of action. Thus it cannot be concluded that use of the representativeness heuristic in the experimental situations tested is not cost effective. To the extent, however, that one is willing to assume that action choices are sensitive to judgments of outcome probabilities, and these action choices have differential expected payoffs, a finding of extensive heuristic use by auditors would suggest further research to assess the economic consequences of such use.