Do Strategic Reasoning and Brainstorming Help Auditors Change Their Standard Audit Procedures in Response to Fraud Risk?
研究检验了战略推理和小组头脑风暴两种干预措施对审计师在高舞弊风险环境下修改标准审计程序有效性的影响，发现两者均能提升修改效果，但组合使用并未显著优于单独使用。
ABSTRACT: The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board recently reported that its inspections show that auditors fail to effectively modify their standard audit procedures in response to fraud risk. Prior academic research is consistent with this finding. Our study examines the effects of two interventions on auditors' planning decisions in a high-fraud-risk setting: strategic reasoning and brainstorming in groups. Both interventions are predicted to lead auditors to more effectively modify their planned audit procedures. We use a panel of fraud experts to identify effective modifications to the audit plan of a specific fraud case. The experts' recommendations are then used to evaluate the effectiveness of practicing auditors' audit plans with and without the two interventions. We predict and find that each intervention leads to more effective modifications to the standard audit procedures and that the combination of the interventions is not significantly more effective than either intervention used alone.