Accountability demands and the auditor's evidence search strategy: The influence of reviewer preferences and the nature of the response (belief vs. action)

This study examines differences in auditors' search behaviors associated wi th the preferences of audit management (reviewer preferences) and the natur e of the required response (belief versus action) in the context of an acco unts receivable collectibility review. I find that auditors facing reviewer s who expressed concern about auditors spending time specifically looking f or evidence inconsistent with explanations provided by the client (credence preference) examined fewer evidence items and followed a more client-promp ted search (i.e., a search for evidence that follows directly from the clie nt's explanation) than those facing reviewers who expressed concern about a uditors' ready acceptance of client explanations without adequate justifica tion (skepticism preference) and those facing reviewers who expressed no sp ecific concern (unknown preference). Further, auditors in the action condit ions examined fewer evidence items and spent less time per evidence item th an those in the judgment conditions. Additional analyses also indicate that auditors who were held accountable to a reviewer with an unknown preferenc e generally responded as if the reviewer maintained a skepticism preference .