REFERENCES
Agoglia
C.
,
Brazel
J.
,
Hatfield
R.
, and
Jackson
S.
2010
. How do audit workpaper reviewers cope with the conflicting pressures of detecting misstatements and balancing client workloads?
Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory
(forthcoming
).Allen
R.
,
Hermanson
D.
,
Koslowski
T.
, and
Ramsay
R.
2006
. Auditor risk assessment: Insights from the academic literature
. Accounting Horizons
(June
): 157
–177
.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
.
1983
. Audit Sampling. AU Section No. 350
. New York, NY:
AICPA
.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
.
1988
. The Auditor’s Consideration of an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. AU Section No. 341
. New York, NY:
AICPA
.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
.
1993
. Service Organizations. AU Section No. 324
. New York, NY:
AICPA
.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
.
2008
. Audit Sampling Guide. New York, New York:
AICPA
.American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
.
2009
. Planning and Supervision. AU Section No. 311
. New York, NY:
AICPA
.Asare
S. K.
, and
Wright
A. M.
2004
. The effectiveness of alternative risk assessment and program planning tools in a fraud setting
. Contemporary Accounting Research
21
(2
): 325
–352
.Brazel
J. F.
,
Agoglia
C. P.
, and
Hatfield
R. C.
2004
. Electronic versus face-to-face review: The effects of alternative forms of review on auditors’ performance
. The Accounting Review
79
(4
): 949
–966
.Glover
S.
,
Prawitt
D.
,
Schultz
J.
, and
Zimbelman
M. F.
2003
. A test of changes in auditors’ fraud-related planning judgments since the issuance of SAS No. 82
. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory
22
(2
): 237
–251
.Glover
S. M.
,
Prawitt
D. F.
,
Liljegren
J. T.
, and
W. F.
Messier
, Jr.
2009
. Component materiality for group audits
. Journal of Accountancy
(December
): 42
–46
.International Federation of Accountants (IFAC)
.
2009
. Audits of Group Financial Statements (Including the Work of Component Auditors). International Standard on Auditing No. 600
. New York, NY:
IFAC
.Payne
E. A.
,
Ramsay
R. J.
, and
Bamber
E. M.
2010
. The effect of alternative types of review on auditors' procedures and performance
. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory
29
(1
): 207
–220
.Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)
.
2007
. An Audit of Internal Control over Financial Reporting that is Integrated with an Audit of Financial Statements. Auditing Standard No. 5
. Washington, DC:
PCAOB
.Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
.
2006
. Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements When Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements. Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108
. Washington, DC:
SEC
.Zimbelman
M. F.
1997
. The effects of SAS No. 82 on auditors’ attention to fraud risk factors and audit planning decisions
. Journal of Accounting Research
35
(Supplement
): 75
–97
.Zuber
G. R.
,
Elliott
R. K.
,
W. R.
Kinney
, Jr., and
Leisenring
J. L.
1983
. Using materiality in audit planning
. Journal of Accountancy
(March
): 42
–54
.
This content is only available via PDF.
American Accounting Association
2010
