The Myth of Conventional Wisdom on Changing Multiple-Choice Answers

Business students are often warned not to change multiple-choice answers once an original selection has been made. This conventional wisdom, that the first answer selected usually is the correct answer, is in contrast with the conclusions of research in the education and psychology fields. This study extends these earlier studies by using students in accounting principles I and principles II classes, and by examining whether the type of question (numeric or non-numeric) affects answer-changing behavior. On average, for every point lost roughly three points were gained by changing answers for both groups. Additionally, gender was found not to be a factor on the net point gain/loss of the student. Question type did not influence the overall tendency to change answers for the principles I group; however, the principles II students changed fewer numerical question answers than non-numerical answers. Also, some tendency was shown for males to change more answers than females when type of question and direction of change were analyzed. Overall, the findings clearly evidence the benefit of changing multiple-choice answers if a student believes his/her original selection to be incorrect

Investor Views of Audit Assurance: Recent Evidence of the Expectation Gap

Investors and financial statement users long have agreed on the usefulness of the audit in financial reporting. Over time, however, auditors have been expected to provide assurance in varying degrees and for different purposes. Differences in perception -- especially regarding assurances provided -- between users, preparers and auditors have been termed the expectation gap. This article provides some startling evidence of the existence of such a gap in investor perceptions of the assurance provided by an audit

SAS no. 58: Did the ASB Really Listen?

One thousand-plus letters are a lot of mail. That\u27s how many comments the American Institute of CPAs auditing standards board received when it proposed 10 new standards to help close the expectations gap between what auditors perceive as their responsibility and what the public thinks. Did the ASB really listen to these comment letters before finalizing nine SASs, or did it simply solicit the comments to fulfill the standard-setting, due-process procedures mandated by the AICPA board of directors

Teaching Accounting Concepts Versus Applications: An Analysis of Student Attitudes

Accounting faculty have long debated the usefulness and appropriateness of their teaching endeavor. One of the central themes in this continuing discussion is that of teaching concepts versus teaching applications of current accounting principles. In order to empirically address this issue, students\u27 attitudes toward the conceptual aspects and toward the practical application aspects of financial accounting were assessed. This research also reports on the development and validation of an instrument that measures attitudes of students toward these aspects of financial accounting. The instrument demonstrated high reliability with both intermediate and introductory students. Intermediate students were found to distinguish between attitudes toward the conceptual and application aspects of financial accounting, while the introductory students were found to have only a single overall attitude toward financial accounting. Implications for accounting education are discussed

The New Auditor\u27s Report: Have the Benefits of Wording Changes Been Acknowledged Outside the CPA Profession?

CPAs use the auditor\u27s report to communicate their opinions of an entity\u27s financial statements and related disclosures. Concerned parties, in turn, use the report to assess the integrity of the financial statements and the accuracy of the disclosures. In 1988, the American Institute of CPAs auditing standards board established new wording for the standard unqualified audit report. It also revised the reporting requirements and types of audit reports allowed (for example, the subject-to report for uncertainties and except-for report for consistency departures were eliminated). The new wording appears in Statement on Auditing Standards no. 58, Reports on Audited Financial Statements. With these audit reporting changes and modifications comes the need for CPAs to assess how financial statement users perceive the new reports and what impact the wording has had. One question is how users who continually encounter different types of reports are affected. Have these changes been acknowledged by those outside the CPA profession? If so, have they been beneficial

Bankers\u27 Reactions to the New Standard Report and Consistency Reporting Requirements

The auditor\u27s report is the primary source of information for a bank loan officer concerned with the integrity of a potential client\u27s financial statements. Recently, the auditing standards board of the American Institute of CPAs established new wording and reporting requirements in the standard report for companies that change accounting principles -- among other changes in reporting on audited financial statements. The ASB modified the long-lived standard report wording to which the U.S. financial community had grown accustomed. One hundred and ninety-nine randomly selected bank loan officers from across the United States participated in a mail survey designed to assess the impact of the new report and consistency reporting requirements on commercial loan officers\u27 decisions

[Introduction to] Setting the Standard for the New Auditor\u27s Report: An Analysis of Attempts to Influence the Auditing Standards Board

This study addresses the lack of research on the process by which authoritative auditing standards are established by presenting a longitudinal study of the two-year development of SAS No 58, Reports on Audited Financial Statements , by the Auditing Standards Board. The study catalogues and examines the perspectives and influences of virtually all parties involved in establishing the standard, including the comment letters, from the Financial Executives Institute, Treadway Commission, and the Securities and Exchange Commission. The result is an extensive identification and rigorous analysis of the issues surrounding audit reports, alternative solutions considered, and the rationale underlying the ultimate decisions. The study also provides an elaboration on the content analysis research methodology used to assess the comment letters and how this assessment was integrated into the overall study. Additionally, the study describes the history behind audit reporting in the United States, and includes an exhaustive summary of the research related to the auditor\u27s report in a well-organized annotated bibliography.https://scholarship.richmond.edu/bookshelf/1052/thumbnail.jp

Learning Styles of Introductory Accounting Students: An Extension to Course Performance and Satisfaction

Togo and Baldwin (1990) have recently utilized Kolb\u27s 1976 Learning Style Inventory (LSI) in the assessment of introductory accounting student performance. This study extends this earlier work by examining the effect of learning style, as measured by the 1985 LSI, on introductory exam performance and ratings of satisfaction with the introductory course. Learning style was found to be significantly related to overall exam performance; with those maintaining a similar learning style as the instructor (i.e. assimilator) performing best. Additionally, learning style was also found to affect student ratings of course satisfaction

Learning Styles of Students and Instructors: An Analysis of Course Performance and Satisfaction

Accounting educators have utilized Kolb\u27s Learning Style Inventory (LSI) in the assessment of accounting students and the accounting curriculum. This study extends these earlier works by examining the effect of student and instructor learning style, as measured by the revised 1985 LSI, on introductory course performance and ratings of satisfaction with both the course and the instructor. The results indicate no significant effect of student/teacher learning style interaction on final course grade or students\u27 ratings of satisfaction. However, instructors having a convergent learning style were given significantly higher satisfaction ratings regardless of student learning style

Do CEOs and Principal Financial Officers Take a Bath Separately or Together?: An Investigation of Discretionary Accruals Surrounding Appointments of New CEOs and PFOs

This study presents the first targeted examination of changes in financial reporting surrounding the appointment of both new CEOs and Principal Financial Officers (PFOs). We identify companies that appoint new CEOs and PFOs in the period 1995 to 2002 and find that the change in discretionary accruals is negative and significant in the year of hire (from t-1 to t) for firms appointing a new CEO or both a new CEO and PFO (i.e., the big bath ), but not for firms appointing only a new PFO. We also find that firms appointing both executives in the same year report significant increases in discretionary accruals in the subsequent year (from t to t+1) and for the combined two-years surrounding the joint appointments (from t-1 to t+1). However, similar increases are not found for firms hiring only one of these executives. Additional analyses indicate that our results are robust when examining other discretionary financial reporting choices (i.e., special items, extraordinary items and discontinued operations), and that the type of compensation contract offered by the firm (i.e., having a high bonus component ) is not significantly related to the changes in discretionary accruals surrounding these appointments. Our findings contribute to the corporate governance and executive turnover literature and provide evidence of a heightened financial reporting effect when firms concurrently appoint both new CEOs and PFOs