An auditor generating potential explanations for an unusual variance in analytical review may utilize a decision aid, which provides many explanations. However, circumstances of budgetary constraints and limited cognitive load deter an auditor from using a lengthy list of explanations in an information search. A two‐way between‐subjects design was created to investigate the effects of two complementary approaches to trimming down the lengthy list on the number of remaining explanations carried forward into an information search. These two approaches, which represent the same goal (reducing the list) but framed differently, are found to result in a significantly different number of remaining explanations, in both low‐ and high‐risk audit environments. The results of the study suggest that the extent to which an auditor narrows the lengthy list of explanations is important to the implementation of decision aids in analytical review.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 February 2002
