Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study examines the extent to which immaterial uncorrected errors may combine to affect specific financial ratios. A simulation is performed in which three balance sheet accounts and three related income statement accounts are seeded with immaterial errors. The magnitudes of the errors are controlled so the financial statement account balances are materially correct both individually and in the aggregate. The study examines six materiality heuristics for each of three industry classifications and three different error distribution patterns. For each heuristic/industry combination and error distribution pattern, a 95 percent confidence interval is generated for nine financial ratios.

Results indicate that immaterial errors may combine to create substantial variances in some ratios. Profitability ratios based on income statement accounts display wide confidence intervals, while solvency ratios based on balance sheet accounts display relatively narrow intervals. Comparison between a standard normal distribution and a nonsymmetrical error distribution indicates that ratio variances are substantial and sensitive to error patterns even when errors are immaterial. Tests for equality of variances identify significant differences between heuristic methods and between industries. When making the decision regarding requiring entry or waiving discovered errors, the auditor should consider the impact of such errors not only on financial statement balances, but on the ways users may combine those balances.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AICPA. 1987a. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 47: Audit Risk and Materiality in Conducting an Audit. New York: AICPA.

AICPA. 1987b. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 56: Analytical Procedures. New York: AICPA.

AICPA. 1989. Statement on Auditing Standards No. 53: The Auditor's Responsibility to Detect and Report Errors and Irregularities. New York: AICPA.

Beneish

M. D.

Press

. 1993. “Costs of Technical Violation of Accounting-Based Covenants.” The Accounting Review 68 (2): 233–256.

Biggs

S. F.

Wild

J. J.

. 1985. “An Investigation of Auditor Judgment in Analytical Review.” The Accounting Review 60 (4): 607–633.

Blocher

Cooper

J. C.

. 1988. “A Study of Auditors' Analytical Review Performance.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 7 (2): 1–28.

Blocher

Willingham

J. J.

. 1985. Analytical Review: A Guide to Evaluating Financial Statements. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Carmichael

D. R.

Willingham

J. J.

. 1989. Auditing Concepts and Methods, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Chen

K. C. W.

Wei

K. C. J.

. 1989. “Creditors' Decisions to Waive Violations of Accounting-Based Debt Covenants.” The Accounting Review 68 (2): 218–232.

10.

Chewing

Pany

Wheeler

. 1989. “Auditor Reporting Decisions Involving Accounting Principle Changes: Some Evidence on Materiality Thresholds.” Journal of Accounting Research 27 (2): 78–96.

11.

Cready

W. M.

1988. “Information Value and Investor Wealth: The Case of Earnings Announcements.” Journal of Accounting Research 26 (1): 1–27.

12.

DeFond

M. L.

Jiambalvo

. 1991. “Incidence and Circumstances of Accounting Errors.” The Accounting Review 66 (3): 643–655.

13.

Dopuch

Holthausen

R. W.

Leftwich

R. W.

. 1987. “Predicting Audit Qualifications with Financial and Market Variables.” The Accounting Review 62 (3): 431–454.

14.

Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). 1980. Qualitative Characteristics of Accounting Information. Stamford, Conn.: FASB.

15.

Fisher

M. H.

1990. “The Effects of Reporting Auditor Materiality Levels Publicly, Privately, or Not at All in an Experimental Markets Setting.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 9 (Supplement): 184–223.

16.

Ham

Losell

Smieliauskas

. 1985. “An Empirical Study of Error Characteristics in Accounting Populations.” The Accounting Review 60 (3): 387–406.

17.

Hand

J. R. M.

1990. “A Test of the Extended Functional Fixation Hypothesis.” The Accounting Review 65 (4): 740–763.

18.

Holder

W. W.

1983. “Analytical Review Procedures in Planning the Audit: An Application Study.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 2 (2): 100–107.

19.

Holstrum

G. L.

Messier

W. F.

Jr.

1982. “A Review and Integration of Empirical Research on Materiality.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 1 (3): 45–63.

20.

Hylas

R. E.

Ashton

R. H.

. 1982. “Audit Detection of Financial Statement Errors.” The Accounting Review 57 (4): 751–765.

21.

Jennings

M. M.

Kneer

D. C.

Reckers

P. M. J.

. 1991. “Selected Auditor Communications and Perceptions of Legal Liability.” Contemporary Accounting Research 7 (2): 449–465.

22.

Kim

Verrecchia

R. E.

. 1991. “Trading Volume and Price Reactions to Public Announcements.” Journal of Accounting Research 29 (2), 302–321.

23.

Kinney

R. K.

Jr.

1987. “Attention-Directing Analytical Review Using Accounting Ratios: A Case Study.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 6 (2): 59–73.

24.

Kinney

R. K.

Jr. McDaniel

L. S.

. 1989. “Characteristics of Firms Correcting Previously Reported Quarterly Earnings.” Journal of Accounting and Economics 11: 71–93.

25.

Kinney

R. K.

Jr. Uecker

W. C.

. 1982. “Mitigating the Consequences of Anchoring in Auditor Judgments.” The Accounting Review 57 (1): 55–69.

26.

Kreutzfeldt

R. W.

Wallace

W. A.

. 1986. “Error Characteristics in Audit Populations: Their Profile and Relationship to Environmental Factors.” Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory 6 (1): 20–43.

27.

Leslie

D. A.

1985. Materiality—The Concept and Its Application to Auditing. Toronto: The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants.

28.

Ramage

J. G.

Krieger

A. M.

Spero

L. L.

. 1979. “An Empirical Study of Error Characteristics in Audit Populations.” Journal of Accounting Research 17 (Supplement): 72–102.

29.

Stice

J. D.

1991. “Using Financial and Market Information to Identify Pre-Engagement Factors Associated with Lawsuits Against Auditors.” The Accounting Review 66 (3): 516–533.

30.

Warren

C. S.

Elliott

R. K.

. 1986. “Materiality and Audit Risk—A Descriptive Study.” Working paper. Montvale, N.J.: KPMG Peat Marwick.

31.

Watson

H. J.

Blackstone

J. H.

Jr.

1989. Computer Simulation, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

32.

Zuber

Elliott

R. K.

Kinney

W. R.

Leisenring

J. J.

. 1983. “Using Materiality in Audit Planning.” Journal of Accountancy (March): 42–44.

The Impact of Materiality Decisions on Financial Ratios: A Computer Simulation

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References