An audit evidence gathering model in online auditing environments

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Chen ◽  
Wally J Smieliauskas ◽  
Gerhard Trippen
Keyword(s):  
Audit Evidence ◽  
Evidence Gathering

scholarly journals Challenges when Auditing Cryptocurrencies

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. A46-A58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishani Edirisinghe Vincent ◽  
Anne M. Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
Audit Planning ◽  
Audit Evidence ◽  
Evidence Gathering ◽  
Client Acceptance ◽  
Four Quadrant

SUMMARY The novelty, ambiguity, and the lack of official guidance surrounding cryptocurrency transactions impose additional audit risks that should be considered during client acceptance and retention and planning audit procedures. We develop a four-quadrant model to assist auditors in client acceptance and continuance decisions and identify cryptocurrency risks that should be considered during audit planning and audit evidence gathering.

Challenges when Auditing Cryptocurrencies

2019 ◽  
pp. 0000-0000
Author(s):  
Nishani Edirisinghe Vincent ◽  
Anne M. Wilkins
Keyword(s):  
Audit Planning ◽  
Audit Evidence ◽  
Evidence Gathering ◽  
Client Acceptance ◽  
Four Quadrant

The novelty, ambiguity, and the lack of official guidance surrounding cryptocurrency transactions impose additional audit risks that should be considered during client-acceptance and retention and planning audit procedures. We develop a four-quadrant model to assist auditors in client-acceptance and continuance decisions and identify cryptocurrency risks that should be considered during audit planning and audit evidence gathering.

Determination of the weight of audit evidence by the method of point ratings in the information security audit

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
Vladislav A. Voevodin ◽  
◽  
Maria S. Markina ◽  
Pavel V. Markin ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Information Security ◽  
Security Audit ◽  
Audit Evidence

The Effects of Judgments of New Clients' Integrity upon Risk Judgments, Audit Evidence, and Fees

2001 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 85-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip R. Beaulieu
Keyword(s):  
Source Credibility ◽  
Prospective Audit ◽  
Fraud Risk ◽  
Audit Evidence ◽  
Risk Judgments

Client integrity concerns auditors when they plan new audit engagements because it is related to both fraud risk and the source credibility of clients. Auditors may increase audit work and fees when they judge integrity to be below normal. In an experiment, a sample of 63 Canadian audit partners read information about a prospective audit client, including information about the client's CFO. This information was manipulated to support a judgment of either high or low integrity. As hypothesized, judgments of client integrity were negatively related to risk judgments, audit evidence extent recommendations (indirectly through risk judgments), and fee recommendations (indirectly through risk judgments and extent recommendations).

Re/enactment

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Laban Hinton
Keyword(s):  
Lived Experience ◽  
Evidence Gathering ◽  
Peace And Reconciliation ◽  
Reconciliation Process

This Preamble to Part II describes the reenactment at Tuol Sleng prison by Duch and participants as a part of the ECCC’s evidence gathering, and peace and reconciliation process. It introduces chapters on the lived experience of Cambodians who participated in ECCC.

scholarly journals THE NONRANDOM WALK OF KNOWLEDGE

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-264
Author(s):  
Jane R. Bambauer ◽  
Saura Masconale ◽  
Simone M. Sepe
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Selection Effect ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Rational Agents ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Wide Scale ◽  
Evidence Gathering ◽  
Epistemic Goals ◽  
Epistemic Process

AbstractA person’s epistemic goals sometimes clash with pragmatic ones. At times, rational agents will degrade the quality of their epistemic process in order to satisfy a goal that is knowledge-independent (for example, to gain status or at least keep the peace with friends.) This is particularly so when the epistemic quest concerns an abstract political or economic theory, where evidence is likely to be softer and open to interpretation. Before wide-scale adoption of the Internet, people sought out or stumbled upon evidence related to a proposition in a more random way. And it was difficult to aggregate the evidence of friends and other similar people to the exclusion of others, even if one had wanted to. Today, by contrast, the searchable Internet allows people to simultaneously pursue social and epistemic goals.This essay shows that the selection effect caused by a merging of social and epistemic activities will cause both polarization in beliefs and devaluation of expert testimony. This will occur even if agents are rational Bayesians and have moderate credences before talking to their peers. What appears to be rampant dogmatism could be just as well explained by the nonrandom walk in evidence-gathering. This explanation better matches the empirical evidence on how people behave on social media platforms. It also helps clarify why media outlets (not just the Internet platforms) might have their own pragmatic reasons to compromise their epistemic goals in today’s competitive and polarized information market. Yet, it also makes policy intervention much more difficult, since we are unlikely to neatly separate individuals’ epistemic goals from their social ones.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document