Informe de auditoría y comportamiento de los analistas de riesgosel modelo de revisión de creencias

Referencias bibliográficas

• ARNOLD, V.; COLLIER, P.; LEECCH, S. A., y SUTTON, G. [2000]: «The Effect of Experience and Complexity on Order and Recency Bias in Decision Making By Professional Accountants», Accounting and Finance, n.°40, pp. 109-134.
• ASARE, S. K. [1992]: «The Auditor's Going Concern Decision: Interaction of Task Variables and the Sequential Processing of Evidence», The Accounting Review, April, n.° 67, pp. 379-393.
• ASHTON, A., y ASHTON, R. [1988]: «Sequential Revision in Auditing», The Accounting Review, October, pp. 623-641.
• -[1990]: «Evidence-Responsiveness in Professional Judgment: Effects of Positi ve versus Negative Evidence and Presentation Mode», Journal of Organizational Behavior and Human Decision, n.° 46, vol.1, pp. 1-19.
• BAKER, W. M., y CUNNINGHAM, G. M. [1990]: «Loan Officer Reactions to Review and Taxis Basis Statements», CPA Journal, August, pp. 52-54.
• BAMBER, E. M. [1983]: «Expert Judgment in the Audit Team: A Source of Reliability Approach», Journal of Accounting Research, vol. 21, n.° 2, pp. 396-412.
• - [1993]: «Opportunities in Behavioral Accounting Research», Behavioral Research in Accounting, vol. 5, pp. 1-29.
• BAMBER, E. M., y STRATTON, R. A. [1997]: «The Information Content of the Uncer-tainty-modified Audit Report: Evidence from Bank Loan Officers», Accounting Horizons, June, vol. 11, n.° 2, pp. 1-11.
• BAMBER, E. M.; RAMSAY, R. J., y TUBBS, R. M. [1997]: «An Examination of the Descriptive Validity of the Belief-Revision Model and Alternative Attitudes to Evidence in Auditing», Accounting, Organization and Society, vol. 22, n.° 3/4, pp. 249-268.
• BANCO DE ESPANA [1991]: Circular 4/1991, de 14 de junio. BOE de 27 de junio.
• BANDYOPADHYAY, S. P., y FRANCIS, J. R. [1995]: «The Economic Effect of Differing Levels of Auditor Assurance on Bankers' Lending Decisions», Revue Cana-dienne des Sciences de l'Administration, September, vol. 12, n.° 3, pp. 238-252.
• BEAULIEU, P. R. [1994]: «Commercial Lenders' Use of Accounting Information in Interaction With Source Credibility», Contemporary Accounting Research, Spring, vol. 10, n.° 2, pp. 557-585.
• BEAULIEU, P. R. [1996]: «A Note on the Role of Memory in Commercial Loan Officers' Use of Accounting and Character Information», Accounting, Organization and Society, vol. 21, n.° 6, pp. 515-528.
• BELKAOUI, A. R. [1992]: «Accrual Accounting, Modified Cash Basis of Accounting and the Loan Decision: An Experiment in Functional Fixations, Management Finance, vol. 18, n.° 5, pp. 3-13.
• CHAN, M. K. [1995]: «The Moderating Effects of Cognitive Style and Recency Effects on the Auditor's Belief Revision Process», Managerial Auditing Journal, n.° 9, pp. 22-28.
• CRASWELL, A. [1985]: «Studies of the Information Content of Qualified Audit Reports», Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, n.° 1, pp. 39-115.
• EINHORN, H., y HOGARTH, R. [1985]: «Ambiguity and Uncertainty in Probabilistic Inferences», Psychological Review, vol. 92, n.° 4, pp. 433-476.
• ESTES, R., y REIMER, M. [1977]: «A Study of the Effect of Qualified Auditors' Opinions on Bankers' Lending Decisions», Accounting and Business Research, Autumn, pp. 250-259.
• FIRTH, M. [1979]: «Qualified Audit Reports and Bank Lending Decisions», Journal of Bank Research, Winter, pp. 237-241.
• -[1980]: «A Note on the Impact of Audit Qualifications on Lending and Credit Decisions», Journal of Banking and Finance, vol. 4, pp. 257-267.
• GEIGER, M. A. [1992]: «Audit Disclosures of Consistency: An Analysis of Loan Officer Reaction to SAS 58», Advances in Accounting, vol.10, pp. 77-90.
• -[1994]: «The New Auditor's Report», Journal of Accountancy, November, pp. 59-64.
• GUL, F. A. [1987]: «The Effects of Uncertainty Reporting on Lending Officers' Perceptions of Risk and Additional Information Required», ABACUS, vol. 23, n.° 2,pp. 172-181.
• HOGARTH, R., y EINHORN, H. [1992]: «Orders Effects in Belief Updating: The Belief Adjustment Model», Cognitive Psychology, vol. 24, pp. 1-55.
• HOUGHTON, K. A. [1983]: «Audit Reports: Their Impact on the Loan Decision Process and Outcome: an Experiment», Accounting and Business Research, vol. 13, n.° 66, pp. 15-20.
• JOHNSON, D. A.; PANY, K., y WHITE, R. [1983]: «Audit Reports and the Loan Decision: Actions and Perceptions», Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Spring, vol. 2, n.° 2, pp. 38-51.
• JOHNSON, E. N. [1995]: «Effects of Information Order, Group Assistance, and Experience on Auditors' Sequential Belief Revision», Journal of Economic Psychology, n.» 16, pp. 137-160.
• KELLEY, A. [1985]: «Business Credit and Skills, Credit and Financial Management, December, pp. 11-16.
• LASALLE, R. E., y ANANDARAJAN, A. [1997]: «Bank Loan Officers' Reactions to Audit Reports Issued to Entities with Litigation and Going Concern Uncertainties», Accounting Horizons, June, vol. 11, n.° 2, pp. 33-40.
• LIBBY, R. [1979]: «The Impact of Uncertainty Reporting on the Loan Decision», Journal of Accounting Research, Supplement, vol. 17, pp. 35-57.
• MESSIER, F. [1992]: «The Sequencing of Audit Evidence: Its Impact on the Extent of Audit Testing and Report Formulation», Accounting & Business Research, n.° 86, pp. 143-150.
• MILLER, J., y SMITH, L. M. [2000]: «The Effects of the Level of Assurance, Accounting Firm, Capital Structure, and Bank Size on Bank Lending Decisions», Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, Winter, vol. 7, n.° 1, pp. 51-71.
• MILLER, J.; REED, S. A., y STRAWSER, R. H. [1993]: «Bank Loan Officers' Perceptions of the New Audit Report», Accounting Horizons, March, vol. 7, n.° 1, pp. 39-52.
• MONROE, G. S., y NG, J. [2000]: «An Examination of Order Effects in Auditors' Inherent Risk Assessments», Accounting and Finance, n.° 40, pp. 153-168.
• OTLEY, D. T., y PEARCE, B. J. [1996]: «Auditor Time Pressure: Consequences and Antecedents», Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, vol.19, n.° 1, pp. 31-58.
• PANY, K., y JOHNSON, D. A. [1985]: «The Death (Perhaps Timely) of an Audit Report: Some Empirical Results», Advances in Accounting, vol.2, pp. 247-259.
• PUCHETA, M. C. [2002]: «Evidencia Empirica del Contenido Informativo del Informe de Auditoria», Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Valencia.
• RODGERS, W. [1991]: «How do Loan Officers Make Their Decision about Credit Risk? A Study of Parallel Distributed Processing», Journal of Economic Psychology, vol. 12, pp. 243-265.
• RONEN, J. Y., LIVINGSTON, L. [1975]: «An Expectancy Theory Approach to the Moti-vational Impact of Budgets», The Accounting Review, October, pp. 671-685.
• Ruiz, E. [1997]: Los Objetivos del Informe de Auditoria, V Premio Carlos Cubillo Valverde, Instituto de Contabilidad y Auditoria de Cuentas.
• RUTH, G. [1987]: Commercial landing, American Bankers Association, Washington.
• SOLOMON, I., y TROTMAN, K. [2002]: «Experimental Judgment and Decision Research in Auditing: The First 25 Years of AOS», Accounting, Organization and Society, May, vol.28, n.° 4 , pp. 395-412.
• TROTMAN, K. [1996]: «Research Methods for Judgment and Decision Making Studies in Auditing. Coopers & Lybrand Accounting Research Methodology, Monograph n.° 3, Ed. Coopers & Lybrand and Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand.
• TROTMAN, K. T., y WRIGHT, A. [2000]: «Order Effects and Recency: Where Do We Go From Here?», Accounting and Finance, n.° 40, pp. 169-182.
• TUBBS, R. M.; MESSIER, F., y KNECHEL, W. R. [1990]: «Recency and Presentation Mode Effects in the Auditor's Belief Revision Process», The Accounting Review, April, vol. 65, n.° 2, pp. 452-460.
• TVERSKY, A., y KAHNEMAN, D. [1974]: «Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristic and Biases», Sciences, n.° 185, pp. 1124-1131.
• WRIGHT, M. E., y DAVIDSON, R. A. [2000]: «The Effect of Auditor Attestation and To-lerance for Ambiguity on Commercial Lending Decisions», Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, Fall, vol. 19, n.° 2, pp. 67-81.