Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline
The primary duty of auditors is to attest to the truth and fairness of financial information contained in the financial statements. This information may be relied upon by users in making business decisions. Thus it is imperative that the auditor conduct the audit with due care and competence. Ext...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project (FYP) |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/64036 |
| _version_ | 1811683219198705664 |
|---|---|
| author | Ong, Chern Chern Teoh, Beng Khim Soh, Sok Ping |
| author2 | Tan Hun Tong |
| author_facet | Tan Hun Tong Ong, Chern Chern Teoh, Beng Khim Soh, Sok Ping |
| author_sort | Ong, Chern Chern |
| collection | NTU |
| description | The primary duty of auditors is to attest to the truth and fairness of financial information
contained in the financial statements. This information may be relied upon by users in
making business decisions. Thus it is imperative that the auditor conduct the audit with
due care and competence. Extensive judgement is required in performing the audit. As a
result, auditing guidelines are issued to assist auditors in the performance of an audit.
Unfortunately, the assistance provided by such guidelines is limited by vagueness and
ambiguity in certain respects. Hence it is inevitable that judgement is also exercised when
interpreting auditing guidelines.
Many empirical studies have indicated a link between human judgement and decisionerrors
(for example, see Libby, 1981). However, the link between auditing guidelines and
the extent of judgement required has rarely been examined. This study attempts to analyse
the quantum and nature of judgement required in interpreting the Singapore Statements of
Auditing Guideline (SAGs) as well as highlight the link between human judgement and
decision-error.
A content analysis was performed on a randomly selected sample of 18 Statements of
Auditing Guideline. Judgements were coded according to a 7-category framework. It
was found that standards, in genera~ contained a large number of vague adjectives and
descriptive adverbs requiring judgement to interpret. The nature of judgement also
differed according to the level of difficulty of the tasks in the guideline. Our findings
highlight the importance of professional judgement, and suggest the need for auditing
guidelines to be more specific to increase their usefulness. |
| first_indexed | 2024-10-01T04:09:15Z |
| format | Final Year Project (FYP) |
| id | ntu-10356/64036 |
| institution | Nanyang Technological University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-10-01T04:09:15Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | ntu-10356/640362023-05-19T05:44:58Z Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline Ong, Chern Chern Teoh, Beng Khim Soh, Sok Ping Tan Hun Tong Nanyang Business School DRNTU::Business::Auditing::Ethics The primary duty of auditors is to attest to the truth and fairness of financial information contained in the financial statements. This information may be relied upon by users in making business decisions. Thus it is imperative that the auditor conduct the audit with due care and competence. Extensive judgement is required in performing the audit. As a result, auditing guidelines are issued to assist auditors in the performance of an audit. Unfortunately, the assistance provided by such guidelines is limited by vagueness and ambiguity in certain respects. Hence it is inevitable that judgement is also exercised when interpreting auditing guidelines. Many empirical studies have indicated a link between human judgement and decisionerrors (for example, see Libby, 1981). However, the link between auditing guidelines and the extent of judgement required has rarely been examined. This study attempts to analyse the quantum and nature of judgement required in interpreting the Singapore Statements of Auditing Guideline (SAGs) as well as highlight the link between human judgement and decision-error. A content analysis was performed on a randomly selected sample of 18 Statements of Auditing Guideline. Judgements were coded according to a 7-category framework. It was found that standards, in genera~ contained a large number of vague adjectives and descriptive adverbs requiring judgement to interpret. The nature of judgement also differed according to the level of difficulty of the tasks in the guideline. Our findings highlight the importance of professional judgement, and suggest the need for auditing guidelines to be more specific to increase their usefulness. ACCOUNTANCY 2015-05-22T04:09:24Z 2015-05-22T04:09:24Z 1994 1994 Final Year Project (FYP) http://hdl.handle.net/10356/64036 en Nanyang Technological University 53 p. application/pdf |
| spellingShingle | DRNTU::Business::Auditing::Ethics Ong, Chern Chern Teoh, Beng Khim Soh, Sok Ping Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title | Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title_full | Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title_fullStr | Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title_full_unstemmed | Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title_short | Judgement in the Singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| title_sort | judgement in the singapore statements of auditing guideline |
| topic | DRNTU::Business::Auditing::Ethics |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/64036 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ongchernchern judgementinthesingaporestatementsofauditingguideline AT teohbengkhim judgementinthesingaporestatementsofauditingguideline AT sohsokping judgementinthesingaporestatementsofauditingguideline |