Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty The influence of heuristic biases and other relevant factors

Asokan Anandarajan, Gary Kleinman, Dan Palmon

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose - Prior literature provides clear evidence that the judgments of experts differ from those of non-experts. For example, Smith and Kida concluded that the extent of common biases that they investigated often are reduced when experts perform job related tasks as compared to students. The aim in this theoretical study is to examine whether "heuristic biases significantly moderate the understanding of experts versus novices in the going concern judgment?" Design/methodology/approach - The authors address the posited question by marshalling extant literature on expert and novice judgments and link these to concepts drawn from the cognitive sciences through the Brunswick Lens Model. Findings - The authors identify a number of heuristics that may bias the going concern decision, based on the work of Kahneman and Tversky among others. They conclude that experience mitigates the unintentional consequences played by heuristic biases. Practical implications - The conclusions have implications for the education and training of auditors, and for the expectation gap. They suggest that both awareness of factors that affect understanding of auditing reports and greater attention to training are important in reducing the expectation gap. Originality/value - This paper develops additional theoretical understanding of factors that may impact the expectation gap. While there has been limited prior discussion of the impact of cognitive factors on differences between experts and novices, the paper significantly expands the range of factors discussed. As such, it should provide a stimulus to new research in this important area.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)345-366
Number of pages22
JournalManagerial Auditing Journal
Volume23
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 30 Apr 2008

Fingerprint

Expert judgment
Going concern
Factors
Heuristics and biases
Uncertainty
Heuristics
Expectations gap
Auditors
Auditing
Design methodology
Cognitive science
Education

Keywords

  • Cognition
  • Experiential learning
  • Training
  • Uncertainty management

Cite this

@article{ddc9cc924f2144bfa8842b329bbddffc,
title = "Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty The influence of heuristic biases and other relevant factors",
abstract = "Purpose - Prior literature provides clear evidence that the judgments of experts differ from those of non-experts. For example, Smith and Kida concluded that the extent of common biases that they investigated often are reduced when experts perform job related tasks as compared to students. The aim in this theoretical study is to examine whether {"}heuristic biases significantly moderate the understanding of experts versus novices in the going concern judgment?{"} Design/methodology/approach - The authors address the posited question by marshalling extant literature on expert and novice judgments and link these to concepts drawn from the cognitive sciences through the Brunswick Lens Model. Findings - The authors identify a number of heuristics that may bias the going concern decision, based on the work of Kahneman and Tversky among others. They conclude that experience mitigates the unintentional consequences played by heuristic biases. Practical implications - The conclusions have implications for the education and training of auditors, and for the expectation gap. They suggest that both awareness of factors that affect understanding of auditing reports and greater attention to training are important in reducing the expectation gap. Originality/value - This paper develops additional theoretical understanding of factors that may impact the expectation gap. While there has been limited prior discussion of the impact of cognitive factors on differences between experts and novices, the paper significantly expands the range of factors discussed. As such, it should provide a stimulus to new research in this important area.",
keywords = "Cognition, Experiential learning, Training, Uncertainty management",
author = "Asokan Anandarajan and Gary Kleinman and Dan Palmon",
year = "2008",
month = "4",
day = "30",
doi = "10.1108/02686900810864309",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "345--366",
journal = "Managerial Auditing Journal",
issn = "0268-6902",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty The influence of heuristic biases and other relevant factors. / Anandarajan, Asokan; Kleinman, Gary; Palmon, Dan.

In: Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 23, No. 4, 30.04.2008, p. 345-366.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty The influence of heuristic biases and other relevant factors

AU - Anandarajan, Asokan

AU - Kleinman, Gary

AU - Palmon, Dan

PY - 2008/4/30

Y1 - 2008/4/30

N2 - Purpose - Prior literature provides clear evidence that the judgments of experts differ from those of non-experts. For example, Smith and Kida concluded that the extent of common biases that they investigated often are reduced when experts perform job related tasks as compared to students. The aim in this theoretical study is to examine whether "heuristic biases significantly moderate the understanding of experts versus novices in the going concern judgment?" Design/methodology/approach - The authors address the posited question by marshalling extant literature on expert and novice judgments and link these to concepts drawn from the cognitive sciences through the Brunswick Lens Model. Findings - The authors identify a number of heuristics that may bias the going concern decision, based on the work of Kahneman and Tversky among others. They conclude that experience mitigates the unintentional consequences played by heuristic biases. Practical implications - The conclusions have implications for the education and training of auditors, and for the expectation gap. They suggest that both awareness of factors that affect understanding of auditing reports and greater attention to training are important in reducing the expectation gap. Originality/value - This paper develops additional theoretical understanding of factors that may impact the expectation gap. While there has been limited prior discussion of the impact of cognitive factors on differences between experts and novices, the paper significantly expands the range of factors discussed. As such, it should provide a stimulus to new research in this important area.

AB - Purpose - Prior literature provides clear evidence that the judgments of experts differ from those of non-experts. For example, Smith and Kida concluded that the extent of common biases that they investigated often are reduced when experts perform job related tasks as compared to students. The aim in this theoretical study is to examine whether "heuristic biases significantly moderate the understanding of experts versus novices in the going concern judgment?" Design/methodology/approach - The authors address the posited question by marshalling extant literature on expert and novice judgments and link these to concepts drawn from the cognitive sciences through the Brunswick Lens Model. Findings - The authors identify a number of heuristics that may bias the going concern decision, based on the work of Kahneman and Tversky among others. They conclude that experience mitigates the unintentional consequences played by heuristic biases. Practical implications - The conclusions have implications for the education and training of auditors, and for the expectation gap. They suggest that both awareness of factors that affect understanding of auditing reports and greater attention to training are important in reducing the expectation gap. Originality/value - This paper develops additional theoretical understanding of factors that may impact the expectation gap. While there has been limited prior discussion of the impact of cognitive factors on differences between experts and novices, the paper significantly expands the range of factors discussed. As such, it should provide a stimulus to new research in this important area.

KW - Cognition

KW - Experiential learning

KW - Training

KW - Uncertainty management

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=42549127695&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/02686900810864309

DO - 10.1108/02686900810864309

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 345

EP - 366

JO - Managerial Auditing Journal

JF - Managerial Auditing Journal

SN - 0268-6902

IS - 4

ER -