Professional Judgments of Principled Network Expansions

Costs of using motor transport is directly related to the quantity and quality of fuel and lubricants and their valuation. The latter depends significantly on the prices generated in the fuel and energy market and the logistics policy of the enterprise, which is the basis for the organization of accounting for fuel and lubricants as an object of accounting, costs and management impact. Considering the organization of accounting as a set of measures to organize the work of the accounting staff and the organization of the process of accounting and reporting, the dominant influence of technical and methodological features of accounting on the formation of levers of management influence. In the article we have compiled a comparative table of the most common in economic practice methods of purchasing fuels and lubricants and identified key details that affect the formation of economic indicators of documentary support of business transactions. The basic methods of purchasing fuel include: cash purchase (has a very limited scope) and non-cash purchases using: list on the sale of petroleum products, coupons, scratch cards and fuel smart cards. The specifics of construction of accounting nomenclatures at the stage of primary and current accounting by each of these methods are revealed. The key problems that complicate the rational organization of accounting of fuel and lubricants in practice are identified: regulatory gaps in the regulation of documentary support of records in accounting; vagueness (or underestimation) of the significance of the contractual settlement of the moment and conditions of transfer of ownership of fuel; lack of practical experience in applying professional judgments in the qualification of objects of accounting for non-cash supply of fuels and lubricants. Based on the results of a critical analysis of the methods of purchasing fuels and lubricants, a conclusion was made about the feasibility of a practical choice in favor of one of them (or a combination thereof) based on an assessment of their efficiency.

Download Full-text

When Should Audit Firms Introduce Analyses of Big Data Into the Audit Process?

Journal of Information Systems ◽

10.2308/isys-51837 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 31 (3) ◽

pp. 81-99 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Anna M. Rose ◽

Jacob M. Rose ◽

Kerri-Ann Sanderson ◽

Jay C. Thibodeau

Keyword(s):

Big Data ◽

Audit Process ◽

Processing Mode ◽

Big 4 ◽

Audit Firms ◽

Audit Evidence ◽

Evaluation Of Evidence ◽

Data Visualizations ◽

Professional Judgments

ABSTRACT This study investigates how the timing of the consideration of Big Data visualizations affects an auditor's evaluation of evidence and professional judgments. In addition, we examine whether the use of an intuitive processing mode, as compared to a deliberative processing mode, influences an auditor's use and evaluation of Big Data visualizations. We conduct an experiment with 127 senior auditors from two Big 4 firms and find that auditors have difficulty recognizing patterns in Big Data visualizations when viewed before more traditional audit evidence. Our findings also indicate that auditors who view Big Data visualizations containing patterns that are contrary to management assertions after they view traditional audit evidence have greater concerns about potential misstatements and increase budgeted hours more. Overall, our results suggest that Big Data visualizations used as evidential matter have fewer benefits when they are viewed before auditors examine more traditional audit evidence.

Download Full-text

Tax Professional Decision Biases: The Effects of Initial Beliefs and Client Preference

Journal of the American Taxation Association ◽

10.2308/jata.2004.26.s-1.1 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 26 (s-1) ◽

pp. 1-29 ◽

Cited By ~ 18

Author(s):

Jennifer B. Kahle ◽

Richard A. White

Keyword(s):

Repeated Measures ◽

Confirmation Bias ◽

Substantial Effect ◽

Repeated Measures Design ◽

Initial Belief ◽

Client Preference ◽

Tax Professionals ◽

Psychology Literature ◽

Disconfirming Evidence ◽

Professional Judgments

While many studies have inferred confirmation bias in a tax decision-making context, the tax professional's initial belief has usually been the same as the client-preferred position. The objective of this study was to disentangle the effects of evidence direction (confirming or disconfirming evidence) and client preference on tax professionals' belief revisions following the examination of additional evidence. In a repeated-measures design, participants recorded an initial belief and a revised belief in response to two independent fact scenarios. Consistent with research related to auditors, but inconsistent with the psychology literature, the results of this study indicate that tax professionals react in a manner opposite to the predictions of confirmation bias, particularly when the evidence reviewed is counter to the client's wishes. Further examination reveals that the client preference has a more substantial effect on tax professional judgments when the evidence being reviewed confirms the professionals' initial beliefs than when it disconfirms their initial beliefs.

Download Full-text

DOSSIER: A Computer Expert System Simulation of Professional Judgments on Schoolteacher Promotion

The Journal of Educational Research ◽

10.1080/00220671.1990.10885944 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 83 (3) ◽

pp. 134-139 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Kenneth D. Peterson

Keyword(s):

Expert System ◽

System Simulation ◽

Professional Judgments

Download Full-text

Quantifying the Clinical Significance of Drug—Drug Interactions: Scaling Pharmacists' Perceptions of a Common Interaction Classification Scheme

Annals of Pharmacotherapy ◽

10.1177/106002809603000902 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 30 (9) ◽

pp. 926-934 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

James S Roberts ◽

Marc L Watrous ◽

Richard M Schulz ◽

Robert P Mauch ◽

Brian S Nightengale

Keyword(s):

Drug Interactions ◽

Clinical Significance ◽

Spatial Representation ◽

Independent Practice ◽

Convenience Sample ◽

Retail Chain ◽

Good Measurement ◽

Level Scale ◽

Professional Judgments ◽

Affect Patient Care

OBJECTIVE: To develop a precise, interval level scale of the clinical significance of drug—drug interactions that reflects the professional judgments of practicing pharmacists. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 63 practicing pharmacists representing hospital (clinical and staff) and retail (chain and independent) practice settings. METHOD: Pharmacists judged the similarity among 15 interaction categories that have been commonly used to classify drug—drug interactions. A multidimensional scaling technique produced a spatial representation (i.e., a psychological map) of the structure inherent in those similarity judgments. Pharmacists' ratings of clinical significance were projected onto that same spatial representation using a multiple regression procedure, and the resulting information was used to develop a scale of clinical significance. RESULTS: The clinical significance scale developed from pharmacists' judgments was substantially different from a comparison scale published in a popular reference. The new scale was more precise than the comparison scale, and it also approximated an interval level of measurement. The judgments used to produce the new clinical significance scale were not reliably influenced by pertinent demographic characteristics of the sample. CONCLUSIONS: Inconsistencies between published clinical significance scales and the professional judgments of practitioners could affect patient care to the degree that a summary measure of clinical significance affects a practitioner's response to a potential drug—drug interaction. The clinical significance scale developed in this study has good measurement characteristics and reflects the professional judgments of practicing pharmacists. Use of the new scale is recommended on these grounds, although further assessment of its generality is warranted.

Download Full-text