{"id":{"repo_id":"uiuc","oai_identifier":"oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/87160"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uiuc/oai:www.ideals.illinois.edu:2142/87160","repository":{"repo_id":"uiuc","name":"University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign","base_url":"https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/oai-pmh"},"display":{"title":"Somewhat Possible or Substantial Doubt? Documentation Requirements, Persuasion Tactics, and Linguistic (Vs. Numerical) Audit Risk Assessments","abstract":"As a whole, this dissertation presents new evidence of the linguistic strategies that auditors use to reach a preferred audit conclusion in the work papers. My findings demonstrate linguistic assessments as more biased and yet justifiable than numerical assessments. Finally, they suggest unintended effects of documentation requirements when audit risks are assessed linguistically rather than numerically.","abstract_html":"As a whole, this dissertation presents new evidence of the linguistic strategies that auditors use to reach a preferred audit conclusion in the work papers. My findings demonstrate linguistic assessments as more biased and yet justifiable than numerical assessments. Finally, they suggest unintended effects of documentation requirements when audit risks are assessed linguistically rather than numerically.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Piercey, Melvin David"],"institution":"University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Accountancy","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Peecher, Mark E."],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2015,"date_issued":"2015-09-28T15:39:23Z","date_published":"2015-09-28T15:39:23Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:28Z","subjects":["Psychology, Behavioral"],"languages":["eng"],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["(MiAaPQ)AAI3242960"],"render_values":[{"text":"(MiAaPQ)AAI3242960","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/2142/87160","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Peecher, Mark E."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Piercey, Melvin David"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2015-09-28T15:39:23Z","10000-01-01","2006"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Accountancy"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Psychology, Behavioral"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["eng"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/87160","(MiAaPQ)AAI3242960"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["As a whole, this dissertation presents new evidence of the linguistic strategies that auditors use to reach a preferred audit conclusion in the work papers. My findings demonstrate linguistic assessments as more biased and yet justifiable than numerical assessments. Finally, they suggest unintended effects of documentation requirements when audit risks are assessed linguistically rather than numerically.","Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-28T15:39:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4848 bytes, checksum: 96035ab3f5e1c23cc7138a224ce498bd (MD5) 3242960.pdf: 2416427 bytes, checksum: 53154c180a146f6ecfa580f44f34202b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 88441 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","94 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Somewhat Possible or Substantial Doubt? Documentation Requirements, Persuasion Tactics, and Linguistic (Vs. Numerical) Audit Risk Assessments"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Peecher, Mark E."],"dc:creator":["Piercey, Melvin David"],"dc:date":["2015-09-28T15:39:23Z","10000-01-01","2006"],"dc:description":["As a whole, this dissertation presents new evidence of the linguistic strategies that auditors use to reach a preferred audit conclusion in the work papers. My findings demonstrate linguistic assessments as more biased and yet justifiable than numerical assessments. Finally, they suggest unintended effects of documentation requirements when audit risks are assessed linguistically rather than numerically.","Made available in DSpace on 2015-09-28T15:39:23Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license.txt: 4848 bytes, checksum: 96035ab3f5e1c23cc7138a224ce498bd (MD5) 3242960.pdf: 2416427 bytes, checksum: 53154c180a146f6ecfa580f44f34202b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006","Embargo set by: Seth Robbins for item 88441 Lift date: Forever Reason: Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","Restricted to the U of I community idenfinitely during batch ingest of legacy ETDs","U of I Only","94 p.","Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2006."],"dc:identifier":["http://hdl.handle.net/2142/87160","(MiAaPQ)AAI3242960"],"dc:language":["eng"],"dc:subject":["Psychology, Behavioral"],"dc:title":["Somewhat Possible or Substantial Doubt? Documentation Requirements, Persuasion Tactics, and Linguistic (Vs. Numerical) Audit Risk Assessments"],"dc:type":["text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Accountancy"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:26:28Z"}