| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 會計學研究所 === 94 === Prior research (O’Donnell and Schultz 2005) documents that performing strategic risk analysis is detrimental to subsequent sensitivity to inconsistent account balances and depicts this effect as halo effect. This thesis, using a different audit case, examines whether this effect exists, and further explores whether or not accountability can mitigate such a bias. In addition, this thesis investigates whether accountability leads to conservatism in assessing internal control risk and strategic risk.
A 2 (accountability vs. no accountability) x 2 (inconsistent account balances vs. consistent account balances) between-subject experiment is conducted with 40 experienced auditors from two Big 4 firms as subjects. The results show no strong evidence of halo effect as a consequence of performing strategic risk analysis. The interactive effect between accountability and consistency of account balances on account risk judgment is not significant; indicating that accountability has not produced the expected effect. Finally, the results provide partial evidence to support that accountability leads to conservative judgment of internal control risk. But, there is no evidence that accountability leads to conservative strategic risk assessment. Explanations for the findings and implications for future research are offered.
|
|---|
