Abstract This study reports descriptive evidence about Computer Audit Specialists' (CASs') decision processes in evaluating EDP controls. Verbal protocol analysis was the primary research method, although non-protocol evidence of how auditors (individually and in groups) performed the case was also collected. Three aspects of our use of protocol analysis are important. First, the three subjects used in the primary part of the study were designated computer audit "experts" by their firm. Second, we obtained 14 individual and 20 group solutions to the case completed by the protocol subjects. Finally, we had a firm solution to the case which served as a criterion value for evaluating the subjects' solutions.
Biggs et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: