دانلود رایگان مقاله لاتین استفاده حسابرسان از روش حسابرسی به کمک کامپیوتر از سایت الزویر
عنوان فارسی مقاله:
چه عواملی استفاده حسابرسان از روش های حسابرسی به کمک کامپیوتر را تحت تاثیر قرار می دهد?
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله:
What factors influence auditors' use of computer-assisted audit techniques?
برای دانلود رایگان مقاله استفاده حسابرسان از روش حسابرسی به کمک کامپیوتر اینجا کلیک نمایید.
مقدمه انگلیسی مقاله:
1. Introduction
While the use of information technology (IT) in the business world has grown exponentially in the past two decades, the extent to which auditors have responded in kind remains an empirical question (Arnold & Sutton, 1998; Curtis & Payne, 2008; Kotb & Roberts, 2011). CAATs are tools and techniques employed by auditors to extract and analyze client data (Braun & Davis, 2003). CAATs hold the promise of enhanced audit effectiveness and efficiency (Zhao, Yen, & Chang, 2004, 389). For example, CAATs enable auditors to test 100% of the population rather than a sample (AICPA, 2001; Curtis & Payne, 2008; Singleton, 2011) or to select sample transactions meeting specific criteria to obtain evidence about control effectiveness (AICPA, 2006; PCAOB, 2010c). Recent audit standards encourage auditors to adopt CAATs to improve audit efficiency and effectiveness (AICPA, 2001, 2002a, 2002b, 2002c, 2006; PCAOB, 2007, 2010a, 2010b). Despite the current emphasis on CAATs, research suggests that auditors do not frequently and systematically use CAATs (Debreceny, Lee, Neo, & Toh, 2005; Kalaba, 2002; Liang, Lin, & Wu, 2001; Payne & Curtis, 2010; Shaikh, 2005). Information systems researchers note that technology cannot improve performance if it is not used (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989; Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). Further, information systems research has developed many theoretical models to predict user acceptance and use of IT. One important model is the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al., 2003). We modified UTAUT for our research to conform to a financial audit context. UTAUT integrates several previously accepted theoretical models to assess the likelihood of success for new technology introductions. Understanding the drivers of acceptance/rejection allows one to proactively design interventions (Venkatesh et al., 2003). UTAUT proposes that four factors influence user acceptance: (1) user expectations about systems' performance (i.e., performance expectancy), (2) users' perceptions about the effort needed to use the new system (i.e., effort expectancy), (3) users' perceptions whether individuals important to them encourage system use (i.e., social in- fluence), and (4) users' expectations regarding the existence of an organizational and technical infrastructure to support system use (i.e., facilitating conditions). Arguably, since larger audit firms are more likely to audit clients with highly complex financial reporting systems, we examine whether factors that influence CAAT use may differ based on firm size (Ahmi & Kent, 2013; Cheney, 2004; Lawrence, Minutti-Meza, & Zhang, 2011). We obtained data from 181 auditors representing Big 4, national, regional, and local firms. Our results provide evidence that CAAT use may be dependent on predictable cost effectiveness tradeoffs. Implications of our findings are that to increase CAAT use, audit firms should improve employee education that emphasizes how CAATs can operationally improve audit efficiency and performance. Our study can be differentiated from related studies on several dimensions. First, prior studies were focused more on the prevalence of CAATs rather than the underlying reasons for their use or non-use (e.g., Braun & Davis, 2003; Debreceny et al., 2005; Lovata, 1990). Second, research has often assessed only a limited number of CAATs using rather narrow participant groups (e.g., Mahzan & Lymer, 2008). In contrast, our study utilizes 181 auditors with varying levels of experience from Big 4, national, regional, and local firms and examines a larger set of CAATs. This is important given that results have been shown to vary based on audit and IT expertise, particularly as it relates to effort expectancy (EE) (Diaz & Loraas, 2010; Mahzan & Lymer, 2008). Third, prior research (e.g., Curtis & Payne, 2008; Diaz & Loraas, 2010; Payne & Curtis, 2010) has used hypothetical experimental cases within the context of restrictive time budgets. The results of these prior studies may not generalize to actual CAAT use. Given these concerns, our study is based on actual CAAT use related to individual auditors' own previous experience with selected clients.1
برای دانلود رایگان مقاله استفاده حسابرسان از روش حسابرسی به کمک کامپیوتر اینجا کلیک نمایید.
کلمات کلیدی:
