{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/27564"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/27564","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"The Effect of Process Accountability on the Evaluation of Audit Evidence: An Examination of the Audit Review Process","abstract":"This dissertation examines the effect of accountability and client risk on auditor efficiency and effectiveness during an audit review task. I considered two types of accountability. The first type is outcome accountability, which represents the type of accountability in the current audit review process. The second type of accountability is process accountability, which is not currently utilized in the audit review process. I also examined two levels of client risk (high and low) because client risk has been shown to impact efficiency and effectiveness of the audit review process. An internet-based experimental instrument was utilized for this study. Participants were practicing auditors. Findings indicate that process accountability improved performance by exhibiting both an increase in identification of errors and a decrease in likelihood of agreement with the preparer. Findings also show that process accountability decreases efficiency by increasing overall time to complete the study and the amount of information reviewed. These results suggest that process accountability, the act of documenting the process used to perform a task, may reduce the chances of audit failure, making the reduction in efficiency acceptable. I also find that participants in the process accountability and high risk groups may have experienced information overload. Both high client risk and process accountability have been shown to increase attention to information and time spent on a task. A decrease in errors identified by individuals in this group when compared to individuals in the process accountability and low risk group may indicate information overload. Also, attrition rates and followup responses from participants who did not complete the study indicate that information overload may have been an issue for participants in the process accountability/high risk group.","abstract_html":"This dissertation examines the effect of accountability and client risk on auditor efficiency and effectiveness during an audit review task. I considered two types of accountability. The first type is outcome accountability, which represents the type of accountability in the current audit review process. The second type of accountability is process accountability, which is not currently utilized in the audit review process. I also examined two levels of client risk (high and low) because client risk has been shown to impact efficiency and effectiveness of the audit review process. An internet-based experimental instrument was utilized for this study. Participants were practicing auditors. Findings indicate that process accountability improved performance by exhibiting both an increase in identification of errors and a decrease in likelihood of agreement with the preparer. Findings also show that process accountability decreases efficiency by increasing overall time to complete the study and the amount of information reviewed. These results suggest that process accountability, the act of documenting the process used to perform a task, may reduce the chances of audit failure, making the reduction in efficiency acceptable. I also find that participants in the process accountability and high risk groups may have experienced information overload. Both high client risk and process accountability have been shown to increase attention to information and time spent on a task. A decrease in errors identified by individuals in this group when compared to individuals in the process accountability and low risk group may indicate information overload. Also, attrition rates and followup responses from participants who did not complete the study indicate that information overload may have been an issue for participants in the process accountability/high risk group.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Reed, Tracy Nelson"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Ph. D.","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":"Accounting and Information Systems","degree_department":"Accounting and Information Systems","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Jenkins, James G."],"committee_members":["Kumar, Raman","Bhattacharjee, Sudip","Oler, Mitchell J.","Salbador, Debra A."],"year":2010,"date_issued":"2010-05-03","date_published":"2010-05-03","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:18:53Z","subjects":["Audit Efficiency","Client Risk","Audit Effectiveness","Accountability","Audit Review"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-05062010-153513"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-05062010-153513","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/27564","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Jenkins, James G."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Kumar, Raman","Bhattacharjee, Sudip","Oler, Mitchell J.","Salbador, Debra A."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Accounting and Information Systems"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Reed, Tracy Nelson"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:11:38Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:11:38Z","2011-12-23"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2010-05-03"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Accounting and Information Systems"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph. D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Audit Efficiency","Client Risk","Audit Effectiveness","Accountability","Audit Review"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-05062010-153513"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/27564"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This dissertation examines the effect of accountability and client risk on auditor efficiency and effectiveness during an audit review task. I considered two types of accountability. The first type is outcome accountability, which represents the type of accountability in the current audit review process. The second type of accountability is process accountability, which is not currently utilized in the audit review process. I also examined two levels of client risk (high and low) because client risk has been shown to impact efficiency and effectiveness of the audit review process. An internet-based experimental instrument was utilized for this study. Participants were practicing auditors. Findings indicate that process accountability improved performance by exhibiting both an increase in identification of errors and a decrease in likelihood of agreement with the preparer. Findings also show that process accountability decreases efficiency by increasing overall time to complete the study and the amount of information reviewed. These results suggest that process accountability, the act of documenting the process used to perform a task, may reduce the chances of audit failure, making the reduction in efficiency acceptable. I also find that participants in the process accountability and high risk groups may have experienced information overload. Both high client risk and process accountability have been shown to increase attention to information and time spent on a task. A decrease in errors identified by individuals in this group when compared to individuals in the process accountability and low risk group may indicate information overload. Also, attrition rates and followup responses from participants who did not complete the study indicate that information overload may have been an issue for participants in the process accountability/high risk group."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Ph. D."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["The Effect of Process Accountability on the Evaluation of Audit Evidence: An Examination of the Audit Review Process"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Jenkins, James G."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Kumar, Raman","Bhattacharjee, Sudip","Oler, Mitchell J.","Salbador, Debra A."],"dc:contributor.department":["Accounting and Information Systems"],"dc:creator":["Reed, Tracy Nelson"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:11:38Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:11:38Z","2011-12-23"],"dc:date.issued":["2010-05-03"],"dc:description.abstract":["This dissertation examines the effect of accountability and client risk on auditor efficiency and effectiveness during an audit review task. I considered two types of accountability. The first type is outcome accountability, which represents the type of accountability in the current audit review process. The second type of accountability is process accountability, which is not currently utilized in the audit review process. I also examined two levels of client risk (high and low) because client risk has been shown to impact efficiency and effectiveness of the audit review process. An internet-based experimental instrument was utilized for this study. Participants were practicing auditors. Findings indicate that process accountability improved performance by exhibiting both an increase in identification of errors and a decrease in likelihood of agreement with the preparer. Findings also show that process accountability decreases efficiency by increasing overall time to complete the study and the amount of information reviewed. These results suggest that process accountability, the act of documenting the process used to perform a task, may reduce the chances of audit failure, making the reduction in efficiency acceptable. I also find that participants in the process accountability and high risk groups may have experienced information overload. Both high client risk and process accountability have been shown to increase attention to information and time spent on a task. A decrease in errors identified by individuals in this group when compared to individuals in the process accountability and low risk group may indicate information overload. Also, attrition rates and followup responses from participants who did not complete the study indicate that information overload may have been an issue for participants in the process accountability/high risk group."],"dc:description.degree":["Ph. D."],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-05062010-153513"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/27564"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:subject":["Audit Efficiency","Client Risk","Audit Effectiveness","Accountability","Audit Review"],"dc:title":["The Effect of Process Accountability on the Evaluation of Audit Evidence: An Examination of the Audit Review Process"],"dc:type":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Accounting and Information Systems"],"thesis:degree_level":["doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph. D."],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:18:53Z"}