Regression Analysis in Auditing: A Comparison of Alternative Investigation Rules--Some Further Evidence.
用实际数据验证了Kinney和Salamon（1982）提出的三种审计调查规则，发现实际数据因变异性大、违反回归假设和趋势导致更多月份被调查，但规则相对效率与有效性基本一致。
Abstract Kinney and Salamon [1982] used simulated data to compare three investigation rules that auditors might use with regression analysis in analytical procedures. This paper presents a comparison of the Kinney and Salamon findings with results from using actual data. The actual data with its greater variability, regression assumption violations, and trends resulted in a greater percentage of months being investigated. The increase in percentage of months investigated produced more Type I errors and fewer Type II errors; however, the relative efficiency and effectiveness of the decision rules found by Kinney and Salamon were generally confirmed in this study.