Retail industry developments - 1996/97; Audit risk alerts

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_indev/1177/thumbnail.jp

When to Make the Sensory Social: Registering in Face-to-Face Openings

This article analyzes naturally occurring video-recorded openings during which participants make the sensory social through the action of registering—calling joint attention to a selected, publicly perceiv- able referent so others shift their sensory attention to it. It examines sequence-initial actions that register referents for which a participant is regarded as responsible. Findings demonstrate a systematic preference organization which observably guides when and how people initiate registering sequences sensitive to ownership of, and displayed stance toward, the target referent. Analysis shows how registering an owned referent achieves intersubjectivity and puts involved participants’ face, affiliation, and social relationship on the line. A video abstract is available at https://youtu.be/rNL70vawG3

When to make the sensory social: Registering in copresent openings

This article provides the first detailed empirical analysis of naturally-occurring videorecorded openings during which participants make the sensory social through the action of registering – calling joint attention to a selected, publicly perceivable referent so others shift their sensory attention to it. Examining sequence-initial actions that register referents for which a participant is regarded as responsible, this study elucidates a systematic preference organization which observably guides when and how people initiate registering sequences sensitive to both referent ownership and referent value. Analysis shows how choosing to register an owned referent puts involved participants’ face, affiliation, and social relationship on the line

Proposed statement on auditing standards : consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit and amendments to statements on auditing standards no. 1, Codification of auditing standards and procedures, and no. 47, Audit risk and materiality in conducting an audit ;Consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit and amendments to statements on auditing standards no. 1, Codification of auditing standards and procedures, and no. 47, Audit risk and materiality in conducting an audit; Exposure draft (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants), 1996, May 1

The Auditing Standards Board (ASB) has issued this exposure draft to provide expanded operational guidance on the consideration of fraud in conducting a financial statement audit. The proposed changes in auditing standards also clarify the auditor\u27s present responsibility to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether caused by error or fraud. In addition, the proposed changes provide added guidance on the standard of due professional care in the performance of work, including the need to exercise professional skepticism, and the concept of reasonable assurance. Proposed Statement on Auditing Standards, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit: This proposed Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS), Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit: 1. Describes fraud and its characteristics. 2. Requires the auditor to specifically assess the risk of material misstatement due to fraud and provides categories of fraud risk factors that should be considered in the auditor\u27s assessment. 3. Provides guidance on how the auditor should respond to the results of the assessment. 4. Provides guidance on the evaluation of audit test results as they relate to the risk of material misstatement due to fraud. 5. Describes related documentation requirements. 6. Provides guidance regarding the auditor\u27s communication about fraud to management, the audit committee, and others. Proposed Amendments to SAS No. 1, Codification of Auditing Standards and Procedures: The exposure draft contains proposed revisions to Section 110 of SAS No. 1, Codification of Auditing Standards and Procedures (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 110, Responsibilities and Functions of the Independent Auditor ), that include a statement of the auditor\u27s responsibility in connection with planning and performing an audit of financial statements. The ASB believes the addition of this paragraph to the standards would clarify the auditor\u27s presently existing responsibility in an audit for the detection of material misstatements in financial statements resulting from fraud. While the statement of responsibility is clarified, it is not substantively changed - that is, it continues to be framed by the concepts of materiality and reasonable assurance. The proposed revisions to Section 230 of SAS No. 1 (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 230, Due Professional Care in the Performance of Work ), include an expanded discussion of due professional care and reasonable assurance. The objective of these revisions is to emphasize the need for professional skepticism throughout the conduct of the audit and to provide guidance on the concept of reasonable assurance. The proposed revisions to SAS No. 1 described above would provide a foundation for the operational guidance on the consideration of fraud to be contained in the proposed SAS, Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. Proposed Amendment to SAS No. 47, Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit: The exposure draft also contains proposed revisions to SAS No. 47, Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 312). These revisions would provide a foundation within the audit risk model for the consideration of fraud and incorporate certain guidance relating to errors that was formerly included in SAS No. 53, The Auditor\u27s Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 316), which is proposed to be superseded. This proposed SAS would supersede SAS No. 53. It also would amend: 1. Section 110 of SAS No. 1 (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU section 110, Responsibilities and Functions of the Independent Auditor ). See appendix A herein for the proposed amendment. 2. Section 230 of SAS No. 1 (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 230, Due Professional Care in the Performance of Work ). See appendix B herein for the proposed amendment. 3. SAS No. 47. See appendix C herein for the proposed amendment. The proposed SAS also would require other conforming changes to certain of the auditing standards and to other materials, such as industry audit and accounting guides.https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sop/1617/thumbnail.jp

Consideration of the internal control structure in a financial statement audit, new edition as of April 1, 1996; Audit guide;Audit and accou

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_indev/1590/thumbnail.jp

Consideration of fraud in a financial statement audit; Statement on auditing standards, 082

AU Section 110 of Statement on Auditing Standards (SAS) No. 1, Codification of Auditing Standards and Procedures, as amended by this Statement [appendix A] (AICPA, Professional Standards, vol. 1, AU sec. 110, Responsibilities and Functions of the Independent Auditor ), states that The auditor has a responsibility to plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by error or fraud. This Statement provides guidance to auditors in fulfilling that responsibility, as it relates to fraud, in an audit of financial statements conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sas/1085/thumbnail.jp

Codification of statements on auditing standards (Including statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements) Numbers 1 to 111, as of January 1, 2006

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sas/1154/thumbnail.jp

Evidential Reasoning & Analytical Techniques In Criminal Pre-Trial Fact Investigation

This thesis is the work of the author and is concerned with the development of a neo-Wigmorean approach to evidential reasoning in police investigation. The thesis evolved out of dissatisfaction with cardinal aspects of traditional approaches to police investigation, practice and training. Five main weaknesses were identified: Firstly, a lack of a theoretical foundation for police training and practice in the investigation of crime and evidence management; secondly, evidence was treated on the basis of its source rather than it's inherent capacity for generating questions; thirdly, the role of inductive elimination was underused and misunderstood; fourthly, concentration on single, isolated cases rather than on the investigation of multiple cases and, fifthly, the credentials of evidence were often assumed rather than considered, assessed and reasoned within the context of argumentation. Inspiration from three sources were used to develop the work: Firstly, John Henry Wigmore provided new insights into the nature of evidential reasoning and formal methods for the construction of arguments; secondly, developments in biochemistry provided new insights into natural methods of storing and using information; thirdly, the science of complexity provided new insights into the complex nature of collections of data that could be developed into complex systems of information and evidence. This thesis is an application of a general methodology supported by new diagnostic and analytical techniques. The methodology was embodied in a software system called Forensic Led Intelligence System: FLINTS. My standpoint is that of a forensic investigator with an interest in how evidential reasoning can improve the operation we call investigation. New areas of evidential reasoning are in progress and these are discussed including a new application in software designed by the author: MAVERICK. There are three main themes; Firstly, how a broadened conception of evidential reasoning supported by new diagnostic and analytical techniques can improve the investigation and discovery process. Secondly, an explanation of how a greater understanding of the roles and effects of different styles of reasoning can assist the user; and thirdly; a range of concepts and tools are presented for the combination, comparison, construction and presentation of evidence in imaginative ways. Taken together these are intended to provide examples of a new approach to the science of evidential reasoning. Originality will be in four key areas; 1. Extending and developing Wigmorean techniques to police investigation and evidence management. 2. Developing existing approaches in single case analysis and introducing an intellectual model for multi case analysis. 3. Introducing a new model for police training in investigative evidential reasoning. 4. Introducing a new software system to manage evidence in multi case approaches using forensic scientific evidence. FLINTS

Codification of statements on auditing standards (Including statements on Standards for Attestation Engagements) Numbers 1 to 101, as of January 1, 2005

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sas/1153/thumbnail.jp