The challenge of accurately weighting contrary advice

The challenge of accurately weighting contrary advice

July 31, 20181 min read

Auditors regularly seek informal advice about their initial judgments from other auditors. Audit firms encourage this advice seeking, believing it enhances professional skepticism and improves professional judgment. But does it? A recent study by Kathryn Kadous, professor of accounting; Justin Leiby (U. Florida); and Mark Peecher (U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) investigates contrasting theories and evidence on whether seeking advice improves auditors’ judgment and on the factors that influence how readily they incorporate contrary advice into their judgments. They find that nonspecialist auditors who seek advice from those with whom they share a close social bond tend to overestimate the value of that advice. On the other hand, specialists tend to underestimate such advice, perhaps, note the authors, because of threats to the specialists’ egos. In both cases the defensibility of the auditors’ conclusions is negatively affected, heightening audit risk.


Connect with:
  • Kathryn Kadous
    Kathryn Kadous Schaefer Chaired Professor of Accounting

    Kadous's research focuses on using psychology to improve investor and auditor decision making.

You might also like...