This study is a post‐SAS No. 82 replication of Zimbelman (1997) (hereafter Z97), which examined the effect of a separate and explicit fraud‐risk assessment as later required by SAS No. 82. Z97 found weak evidence that this requirement would impact auditors' planning judgments. However, because Z97 was conducted before SAS No. 82 was issued, that study was unable to capture the full effect of SAS No. 82 on the audit environment (e.g., related guidance and training, audit policy, and implementation experience). In this study, we compare pre‐ and post‐SAS No. 82 planning judgments and find that post‐SAS No. 82 judgments are more sensitive to fraud risk factors. Specifically, we find that post‐SAS No. 82 participants are more aware of the need to modify audit plans and are more likely to increase the extent of their audit tests in response to increased fraud risk when compared with the pre‐SAS No. 82 participants in Z97. However, we do not find evidence that auditors modify the nature of their planned tests in response to fraud risk either before or after SAS No. 82.
A Test of Changes in Auditors' Fraud‐Related Planning Judgments since the Issuance of SAS No. 82
Steven M. Glover, Douglas F. Prawitt, Joseph J. Schultz, Mark F. Zimbelman; A Test of Changes in Auditors' Fraud‐Related Planning Judgments since the Issuance of SAS No. 82. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory 1 September 2003; 22 (2): 237–251. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2003.22.2.237
Download citation file: