Sequential Belief Revision in Auditing.

Abstract ABSTRACT: Five experiments that examined sequential belief revision in simplified auditing contexts am reported. The results suggest that auditors' belief revisions depend on both the order in which evidence is received and the manner in which it is presented, and they provide preliminary Insights into auditors' "attitudes" toward evidence. The results also suggest that audit judgment may differ from judgment in general in two ways. First, the subjects were "prone" to revise their beliefs when new evidence was received, while the behavioral decision theory literature suggests that persons in general tend to "avoid" new evidence. Second, the subjects revised their beliefs to a greater extent when they received evidence that tended to disconfirm their current beliefs, whereas the literature suggests that persons in general am more strongly Influenced by confirming evidence.