Peter R. Gillett
Publications with PhD Students and Alumni:
"Auditor Perceptions of Prior Involvement and Reputation Threats as Antecedents of Quality Threatening Audit Behavior" Managerial Auditing Journal (Vol. 27, No. 9, 2012, pp. 796 - 820) [with Marietta Peytcheva].
"The Impact Of Multi-Dimensional Corporate Transparency On US Firms’ Credit Ratings And Cost Of Capital" Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting (December 2011) [with David DeBoskey]. (Also presented at the AAA Annual Meeting, Anaheim 2008)
"How Partner's Views Influence Individual Auditors' Judgments" Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (November 2011, pp. 285 - 301) [with Marietta Peytcheva]
"Differential Evaluation of Audit Evidence from Fixed vs. Sequential Sampling" Behavioral Research in Accounting (Vol. 23, No. 1, 2011)[with Marietta Peytcheva]
"CFO Intentions of Fraudulent Financial Reporting" Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory (Spring 2005, pp. 55 - 75) [with Nancy Uddin]. (Also presented at the 2002 American Accounting Association Mid-Atlantic Meeting and the 2003 American Accounting Association Annual Meeting.
"The Effects of Moral Reasoning and Self-Monitoring on CFO Intentions to Report Fraudulently on Financial Statements" The Journal of Business Ethics (Vol. 40, 2002, pp.15-32) [with Nancy Uddin]. (Also presented at the 2001 American Accounting Association Annual Meeting)
Name: DeBoskey, David
Graduation Date: 2006/October
Thesis Title: Corporate Transparency: Key Factors and Their Impact on US Firms
Name: Peytcheva, Marietta
Graduation Date: 2008/May
Thesis Title: Acountability, Reputation Costs, and Opportunistic Auditor Behavior
Name: Uddin, Nancy
Graduation Date: 2000/ May
Thesis Title: The application of the reasoned action model to fraudulent financial statements, with extension.
Early Summer Research Projects of PhD Students:
Name: Marietta Peytcheva
Project Title: Does Sampling Plan Influence Evidence Interpretation in an Audit Context?
This study contributes to the literature on probabilistic inference by examining empirically the relevance of the sampling plan to judgment in an audit context. Although research on decision-making under uncertainty has concluded that human judgment generally violates Bayesian probabilistic reasoning, arguments can be made that statistical intuition conforms better to the frequentist paradigm of inference. Bayesians and frequentists disagree about the importance of the sampling plan in evidence interpretation. Knowledge of the sampling plan is essential to frequentist inference – the same evidence can lead to different decisions about a hypothesis, depending on the sampling plan used to obtain the evidence. Bayesians, on the other hand, maintain that once the evidence is observed, sampling plan is irrelevant to inference about the hypothesis of interest. If decision-makers behave consistently with the frequentist hypothesis, inferential value will be attributed to the sampling plan used to obtain evidence in an audit context. Our results support this hypothesis.