Auditors' Judgment in a Financial Statement Audit and Professional Skepticism in Auditing

审计师对财务报表审计的判断和审计中的职业怀疑

• 批准号: 22653053
• 负责人: TOBA Yoshihide
• 金额: $ 1.77万
• 依托单位: Waseda University
• 依托单位国家: 日本
• 项目类别: Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research
• 财政年份: 2010
• 资助国家: 日本
• 起止时间: 2010 至 2012
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-22653053/
• 关键词: 財務諸表監査; 監査判断; 懐疑主義; アサーション; 職業的懐疑心; 実証主義; 反証主義; 監査上の懐疑主義; 監査の質; neutrality view; presumptive doubt view; アサーション・フレーミング; 監査の失敗; audit risk approach; assertion; professional skepticism; audit judgment; 職業専門家としての正当な注意; 監査証拠; 監査人の認識; 循環取引

An increasing number of arguments have been made on a national and an international level, both academically and practically, for more "professional skepticism in auditing." The internal and external environments surrounding independent auditors have resulted in an eroding of professional skepticism and have threatened to weaken society's trust in auditors. This erosion was observed in the early 1990s and strongly acknowledged by the accounting profession itself. Professional standards have long emphasized an appropriate degree of skepticism throughout the evidence process, which is composed of planning audit programs, performing the procedures, and evaluating the evidence. Auditors are expected to understand that the essence of skepticism is "raising a question" and "exhibiting a questioning mind," yet doing so does not seem to be enough to prevent audit failures resulting from insufficient skepticism.One of the basic issues facing the accounting profession in the US, Europe, and even … More in Japan at the moment is the quality of professional skepticism in auditing. This issue is fundamentally a matter of audit evidence and is concerned with the degree and extent to which auditors should doubt the financial statements. To put it another way, professional skepticism contains the following two facets of the auditor's cognition : the scope and depth. The scope facet of professional skepticism is concerned with the auditor's assertion-framing, which includes determining the basic nature (affirmative and negative) and selection of assertions to be scrutinized and how and to what extent. It is basically related to an auditor's way of knowing and symbolically deals with what approach (positive and/or negative) the auditor should (can) adopt initially prior to beginning the evidence gathering process, and reactively during the evidence gathering process. Thus, professional skepticism in auditing is epistemic in its nature. In general, the number assertions, positive and/or negative, the auditors recognize reflects the scope of their skepticism. The depth facet of professional skepticism is concerned with the evidence, making an evaluative judgment concerning its competence : the relevance, quality (reliability), and quantity to be collected for scrutinizing a particular assertion. This facet is related to the auditor's disposition to raise questions in making such an evidential judgment in a particular audit setting and fundamentally deals with measuring the depth of the auditor's questioning mind. In this sense, professional skepticism in auditing is psychological in nature. In other words, professional skepticism in auditing is dual in nature, applicable at both epistemic and psychological facets of audit cognition. Whether the auditors can successfully accomplish their assurance role under a financial statement audit depends on their success in recognizing and exercising the dual nature of professional skepticism. Auditors therefore need to develop skills in both disciplines. Research on professional skepticism has been in progress for some time, yet almost all prior (empirical) research on the subject has focused on the second facet, particularly on the effects of auditors' psychological traits on professional skepticism. Why? Many studies seem to have been based on a preconception that only an affirmative approach ("substantiating the assertions" : confirmation) can be accepted as the way of knowing under a financial statement audit.It should be noted, however, that another way of knowing is recognized in the philosophy of science, that is, a negative approach ("proactively looking for negative indications of material misstatements : falsification). Under a negative approach, auditors put more focus on uncovering negative instances or signs related to the negative assertions so that they can form a reasonable basis for corroborating their belief in the fair presentation of financial statements.The main objective of this research is to present a conceptual framework for professional skepticism which gives due consideration to its dual nature as well as different views recognized in the audit literature of the auditor's mindset related to skepticism. This conceptual framework can show, in terms of professional skepticism, not only where the current audit practice is considered to rest, but also in which direction the practice may be moving. Less

在国家和国际层面上，越来越多的论点是准确，实际上是为了“在审计方面的专业怀疑”。独立审核员周围的内部和外部环境导致了专业怀疑主义的侵蚀，并威胁要削弱社会对审计师的信任。这种侵蚀是在1990年代初期观察到的，并由会计专业人士本身强烈承认。长期以来，专业标准一直强调了整个证据过程中的适当持怀疑态度，该过程包括计划审计计划，执行程序并评估证据。预计审计师要了解，怀疑主义的本质是“提出一个问题”和“表现出质疑的思想”，但是这样做似乎还不足以防止审计失败是由于持怀疑态度而导致的审计失败。在美国，欧洲，欧洲甚至日本的会计职业面临的基本问题之一，甚至……目前在日本的一刻更具专业人士的精神主义，这是一种优质的审核。从根本上讲，这个问题是审计证据的问题，并且关注审计师在多大程度上怀疑财务报表的程度和程度。换句话说，专业怀疑论包含审计师认知的以下两个方面：范围和深度。专业怀疑论的范围与审计师的断言有关，其中包括确定基本性质（肯定和负面）以及选择要审查的断言以及如何以及在何种程度上。它基本上与审计师的了解和象征性地处理审计师（可以）（可以）在开始证据收集过程之前应采用的方法（正面和/或负面），以及在证据收集过程中进行反应性。这就是审计中的专业怀疑主义的性质本质上是认知的。通常，审计师认识到的积极和/或负面的数量断言反映了他们怀疑的范围。专业怀疑主义的深度方面与证据有关，使评估法官涉及其能力：相关性，质量（可靠性）和数量，以审查特定主张。该方面与审计师的性格有关在特定审核环境中提出证据法官的疑问，并从根本上涉及衡量审计师的质疑思维深度。从这个意义上讲，审计中专业的怀疑论本质上是心理上的。换句话说，审计中的专业怀疑性本质上是双重的，适用于审计认知的认知和心理方面。在财务报表审计下，审计师是​​否可以成功地完成其保证角色，这取决于他们在认识和行使专业怀疑主义双重性质方面的成功。因此，审计师需要在这两个学科中发展技能。专业怀疑主义的研究已经进行了一段时间，但是对该主题的几乎所有先前的（经验）研究都集中在第二个方面，尤其是审计师的心理特征对专业怀疑主义的影响。为什么？许多研究似乎是基于一种先知，即只有一种肯定的方法（“证实主张”：确认）才能被接受为在财务报表审核下的认识方式。与负面断言相关的迹象，使它们可以构成证实他们对财务报表公平呈现的信念的合理基础。这项研究的主要目的是为专业怀疑主义提供一个概念框架，以适当考虑其双重性质，该框架在审计师的审计文献中与专业人士相关的概念概念的框架中，该概念的概念是在概念上识别的。审计实践被认为是休息的，也可以朝着哪个方向发展。较少的

项目成果

循環取引による加ト吉粉飾決算事件(上)

片吉循环交易诈骗结算案（一）

• 发表时间: 2011
• 期刊: 月刊 監査役
• 作者: 明神実枝・清水信年;吉村孝司;鳥羽至英;石井淳蔵;鳥羽至英
• 通讯作者: 鳥羽至英

循環取引による加ト吉粉飾決算事件(下)

片吉循环交易诈骗结算案（二）

• 发表时间: 2011
• 期刊: 月刊 監査役
• 作者: 明神実枝・清水信年;吉村孝司;鳥羽至英;石井淳蔵;鳥羽至英;阪本俊生;吉村孝司;上西充子(2012);佐藤厚;吉村孝司;石井淳蔵;大村英昭・井上俊;吉村孝司;上西充子;鳥羽至英
• 通讯作者: 鳥羽至英

Toward a Conceptual Framework of Professional Skepticism in Auditing.

走向审计专业怀疑主义的概念框架。

• 发表时间: 2011
• 期刊: The Waseda Business & Economics. The Graduate School of Commerce(Waseda University)
• 作者: 上枝正幸;上枝正幸（同志社大・田口聡志先生と共著）;高尾裕二;高尾裕二;高尾裕二;上枝正幸;上枝正幸・上条良夫;高尾裕二;椎葉淳・高尾裕二;太郎丸博;石井淳蔵;石井淳蔵;太郎丸博;石井淳蔵;佐藤一磨・梅崎修・中野貴之・上西充子;吉村孝司;Yoshihide Toba;太郎丸博;横山斉理・高室裕史・水越康介;中川知宏・林洋一郎・梅崎修;野口道彦;吉村孝司;山中浩司;Yoshihide Toba
• 通讯作者: Yoshihide Toba

監査の失敗と監査上の懐疑主義

审计失败和审计怀疑

• 发表时间: 2010
• 期刊: 商学研究科紀要(早稲田大学大学院商学研究科)
• 作者: 明神実枝・清水信年;吉村孝司;鳥羽至英;石井淳蔵;鳥羽至英;阪本俊生;吉村孝司;上西充子(2012);佐藤厚;吉村孝司;石井淳蔵;大村英昭・井上俊;吉村孝司;上西充子;鳥羽至英;大村英昭;石井淳蔵;吉村孝司;鳥羽至英
• 通讯作者: 鳥羽至英

会計監査と企業統治

会计审计和公司治理

• 发表时间: 2011
• 作者: Akira Omori;Hiroyuki Yagi and Yoshihisa Maruyama;Hironori Fukukawa;Hironori Fukukawa;福川裕徳;千代田邦夫,鳥羽至英(責任編集)
• 通讯作者: 千代田邦夫,鳥羽至英(責任編集)