Timeline roadmap display design 1 powerpoint presentation templates.
Presentation Roadmap
description
Transcript of Presentation Roadmap
![Page 1: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
An Interactive Discussion: Contemporary Research on IS Auditors and Automated Controls
Dr. Daniel SelbyUniversity Of RichmondISACA VA January 20, 2011
![Page 2: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Presentation Roadmap
• Interactive Judgment Exercises (20 minutes)
• Interactive Presentation of An Actual Research Study (20 minutes)
• Debriefing (10 minutes)
• Closing Comments/more Q&A
![Page 3: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Key Terms
●Relevant: information that is useful for a specific judgment outcome (Nisbett et al. 1981; Hilton & Fein 1989;Macrae et al. 1992; and Young et al. 2001)
●Irrelevant: information that is of little value for a specific judgment outcome (Nisbett et al. 1981; Hilton & Fein 1989;Macrae et al. 1992; and Young et al. 2001)
●Key Risk Factor (KRF): factor that directly effects the successful completion of an objective
●i.e., KRFs affect the likelihood of a deficiency or material misstatement of a financial statement amount or disclosure
![Page 4: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Motivation● IS auditors’ sift through numerous pieces of information to
target items that are relevant to understanding KRFs (Singleton 2007).
● Individuals have been found to lower their predictions of future outcome predictions when they are exposed to irrelevant information.
● Individuals tend to dilute their predictions by unintentionally overlapping characteristics of the irrelevant information with characteristics of the relevant information.
● Irrelevant information may influence IS auditors to reduce their assessments of KRFs when higher assessments would be more appropriate.
![Page 5: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Research Question
Can IS auditors ignore irrelevant information when they assess key risk factors?
![Page 6: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Why is this study important?
●Irrelevant information in a KRF assessment setting should not be used to assess the KRF.
●If IS auditors decreased their KRF assessments during a financial statement audit as a result of their exposure to irrelevant information, too few resources may be allocated towards better understanding of the KRFs.
●Audit failure may occur
![Page 7: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
So What???
●Investors Lose $$$
●Litigation for IS auditors and their employing firms
●Diminished professional reputations
●i.e., window dressing @ Lehman Brothers
![Page 8: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Theory●People subconsciously use available information whether
relevant or irrelevant, to minimize their cognitive effort during unstructured tasks (Kahneman & Tversky 1972, 1974; Zukier & Jennings 1984).
●Salient features of irrelevant information distract attention away from diagnostic features between the target and the outcome to influence perceptions of similarity for the all available information [i.e., “representativeness” Tversky (1977); Nisbett et al. (1981)].
●Irrelevant information weakens the relationship between the diagnostic information and outcomes suggested by diagnostic information (Young et al. 2001).
![Page 9: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Hypotheses
Ha: Irrelevant information will influence auditors to reduce their:
• KRF effectiveness rating
• likelihood estimate of the risk of material misstatement
• audit plan revision relative to the prior year’s clean audit
![Page 10: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Methodology
●37 IS audit specialists
●38 minutes on average to complete
●Hypothetical integrated audit engagement of a large publicly-traded financial institution
●Pretested Cues (Hackenbrack 1992; Waller and Zimbelman 2003)
●Randomized order (Shaft & Vessey 1998; LaBella & Koehler 2004)
●Manipulation checks: separately rate the diagnosticity (abatement condition in Young et al. 2001)
●Knowledge Test/Background demographics
![Page 11: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Participant Demographics (Std. dev.)
number 37
Avg. # months of experience 49.43 (39.66)
Avg. # of engagements 20.76 ( 26.82)
Avg. # of Professional IS Courses 7.92 (8.14)
Avg. # of IS courses in college 2.95 (3.64)
% professionally Licensed as CISA, CPA, or both
73%
![Page 12: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Means (Std. Deviations)
KRF Effectiveness
Rating
(-3 to +3)
Likelihood Estimate of the Risk of Material Misstatement
(0 to 100)
Audit Plan Revision
Relative to the Prior Year’s Clean Audit
(0 to 10)
Irrelevant Information and Relevant KRF
-0.3(1.27)
43.19(27.54)
7.86(1.32)
Relevant KRF only
0.97(1.19)
57.7(27.22)
8.46(1.41)
![Page 13: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Statistical Results based on one-tail t-tests
●KRF Effectiveness Rating (t = 6.473, p = <0.0001)
●Likelihood Estimate of the Risk of Material Misstatement (t = 3.948, p = 0.0002)
●Audit plan revisions relative to the prior year’s clean audit (t = 2.227; p = 0.0161)
![Page 14: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Knowledge of Automated Controls
• Mitigates the influence of irrelevant evidence• Partitioned experimental participants based on
knowledge test scores• KRF Effectiveness Rating (p = 0.009)• Likelihood Estimate of the Risk of Material
Misstatement (p = 0.002)• Audit plan revisions relative to the prior year’s clean
audit (p = 0.019)
![Page 15: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
ConclusionIf IS auditors are influenced by irrelevant evidence when they assess KRFs as they are in the highly simplified setting presented in this study, professional service firms may want to monitor this as a potential problem so that they can minimize the likelihood of audit failure.
Next steps - Debriefing
![Page 16: Presentation Roadmap](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022062422/568140cc550346895dac991e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
An Interactive Discussion: Contemporary Research on IS Auditors and Automated Controls
Dr. Daniel [email protected]