The Effectiveness of Alternative Training Techniques on Analytical Procedures Performance

Abstract

This study examines the effectiveness of alternative training techniques on improving analytical procedures performance. To account for the sequential and iterative nature of complex analytical procedures, we used two different knowledge acquisition mechanisms (worked-out example and problem solving training) to develop specific training tools that have not been used in prior audit research. In addition, we combined these mechanisms with different levels of self-explanation (with self-explanation or without self-explanation). Participants were provided with no training (baseline group) or six training techniques that included outcome feedback, worked-out example, problem solving, self-explanation, worked-out example with self-explanation and problem solving with self-explanation. Thereafter, participants completed a final analytical procedures case that had an error seeded in the financial statements. Results indicate that "worked-out example" or "problem solving training" combined with self-explanation outperformed all other groups. Additional analyses provide insight on the performance gains of the various training techniques in the initial hypothesis generation and subsequent information search and evaluation phases during analytical procedures. Our findings contribute to the training literature in auditing and psychology by showing that combinations of techniques are required for designing effective training for complex diagnostic decision making like analytical procedures.

Keywords: Analytical Procedures, Diagnostic Decision Making, Hypothesis Generation, Hypothesis Evaluation, Training

JEL Classification: M49, A20