This study identifies conditions under which the audit risk model does, and
does not, describe audit-planning (investment and pricing) decisions. In a
n experiment, audit partners and managers examined one of two cases where a
material misstatement-error or irregularity-was discovered. The auditors a
ssessed the elements of the audit risk model, assessed business risk and pr
ovided recommendations for the audit investment and fee, When the likelihoo
d of an error was high, the audit risk model dominated business risk in the
explanation of the audit investment, and the fee did not contain a risk pr
emium. When the likelihood of an irregularity was high, business risk domin
ated the audit risk model in the explanation of the audit investment, and t
he fee contained a risk premium. These results suggest that the ability of
the audit risk model to describe auditor behavior and the inclination of au
ditors to charge a risk premium depend upon the nature of the risks present
in the audit. In the presence of errors, the audit risk model adequately d
escribed audit-planning decisions; in the presence of irregularities it did
not.