Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Defends the existing auditing theory structure, suggesting its adequacy and potential for further research implications.
Some professors and practitioners have complained that auditing research and practice suffer from lack of a sufficient theoretical foundation. This paper defends the theory structure presented by Mautz and Sharaf in 1961 in terms of its basic sufficiency as a guiding and directing set of theory statements. The structure is analyzed in terms of the fundamental purposes of a theory, and researchable propositions are shown to flow from it. Even though the Mautz and Sharaf theory is not exhaustive, hence not perfect, it appears to offer a far better foundation than the partial alternatives offered by others, and it appears to be a sufficient basis for progress in research and practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jack C. Robertson (1984) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: