A COMPARATIVE-EXAMINATION OF AUDITOR PREMATURE SIGN-OFFS USING THE DIRECT AND THE RANDOMIZED-RESPONSE METHODS

Prior research has examined the incidence of questionable acts by audi tors using a direct method (DM) of inquiry. A potential problem with t he use of the DM of eliciting responses to sensitive issues is respond ent bias. This study assessed the degree of respondent bias by examini ng auditor premature sign-offs using both the DM of inquiry and the ra ndomized response technique (RRT) proposed by Greenberg et al. (1971). The findings using the RRT were that, on the average, auditors premat urely signed off almost ten times over a period of one year. Over 78 p ercent of the auditors admitted to having prematurely signed off at le ast once. A significantly lower incidence of premature sign-offs was r eported by auditors who responded to the DM of elicitation. While the DM of inquiry is an acceptable approach for examining many types of is sues, the results suggest that the RRT is a preferred method for elici ting sensitive information.