The Use Of Substantive Aggregate Analytical Procedures : Do Auditors Particularly Rely On Nonsignificant Outcomes?

In order to find out whether auditors particularly rely on results of substantive analytical procedures which indicate no significant difference between the auditor's expectation of recorded amounts and the book value, an experimental investigation was conducted. The findings show that auditors do rely on nonsignificant outcomes of substantive aggregate analytical procedures when assessing the likelihood of material misstatements. Although they overestimate the reliability of nonsignificant outcomes, they do not particularly rely on them. Instead, when adjusting the audit programme, their audit decisions are asymmetrical. Where outcomes are nonsignificant, they do not adjust the original proportion of tests of details, whereas they increase the proportion if the outcome is significant.