Much research over the last 30 years has provided evidence that individuals display accounting fixation; that is, their cognitive process does not appropriately adapt to cross‐sectional or temporal differences in an accounting method. This paper presents the results of a quasi‐experimental test of the hypothesis that cognitive adaptation to a change in accounting method is an ordinal interactive function of three person characteristics: relevant accounting knowledge, general problem‐solving ability, and intrinsic motivation to appropriately engage in the decision task. Based on a product‐pricing decision task in which participants are provided with product costs reported by two generally employed product‐costing methods (activity‐based costing [ABC] and volume‐based costing), the results show that the majority of participants did not change their cognitive behavior when there was a change in the costing method. Further, those participants who did adapt to the change in accounting method, and thus avoided accounting fixation, did so by debiasing costs reported by volume‐based costing but not by ABC. Finally, these adapters generally exhibited high values for all three of the person characteristics compared with those who did not adapt.

This paper extends the prior empirical research that explains the perceived use or importance of budget control or both, with organizational context and structure in manufacturing organizations. In this paper, the perceived importance of expenditure budget control in research and development (R&D) work groups is explained empirically by organizational context (R&D work group size, source of R&D funding, and size of R&D budget) and the management control system (steps in the control process, social control). Data obtained from 76 R&D work groups in ten organizations support the five hypotheses. Generally, there is an interaction between the steps in the control process and each of the other independent variables on the perceived importance of expenditure budget control for management control of the R&D work group. Résumé. Le présent article s'inscrit dans le prolongement des travaux de recherche empiriques précédents visant à expliquer l'utilisation perçue du contrôle budgétaire ou son importance ‐ sinon les deux ‐ dans le contexte et la structure d'organisation des entreprises manufacturières. Dans cet article, l'importance du contrôle du budget des investissements perçue par les groupes de travail en recherche et développement (R & D) s'explique concrètement par le context organisationnel (la taille du groupe de travail en R & D, la source de financement des activités de R & D et l'importance des crédits affectés à ces activités) et par le système de contrôle de gestion (étapes du processus de contrôle, contrôle social). Les données obtenues auprès de 76 groupes de travail en R & D dans dix organisations viennent confirmer les cinq hypothèses des auteurs. L'on relève, de façon générale, une interaction entre, d'une part, les étapes du processus de contrôle et chacune des autres variables indépendantes et, d'autre part, l'importance perçue du contrôle du budget des investissements aux fins du contrôle de gestion du groupe de travail en R & D.

This experimental study tests the predicted effects of three performance‐contingent pay schemes on subordinate misrepresentations: profit sharing, a single‐subordinate truth‐inducing scheme, and the Groves scheme. A contribution not found in prior experimental research is the introduction of the distinction between direct and indirect misrepresentations. The results show that, as predicted, the three schemes have different abilities to deter the two types of misrepresentations. The fewest direct and indirect misrepresentations occur under the Groves scheme and the most under the linear profit‐sharing scheme. There is no significant difference between the single‐subordinate truth‐inducing scheme and the Groves scheme in the incidence of direct misrepresentations, but indirect misrepresentations are significantly more frequent under the former. Résumé. La présente étude expérimentale vise à tester certaines hypothèses relatives aux résultats de l'application de trois structures salariales liées au rendement sur les déclarations trompeuses des subordonnés: la participation linéaire aux bénéfices, une structure salariale individuelle favorisant la franchise et la structure Groves. Cette étude se démarque des etudes expérimentales antérieures en ce qu'elle introduit une distinction entre l'information trompeuse directe et indirecte. Les résultats révèlent que, conformément aux hypothèses, les trois structures salariales présentent des capacités différentes de décourager les deux formes de déclarations trompeuses. La structure Groves est celle qui occasionne le plus petit nombre de déclarations trompeuses directes et indirectes, tandis que la participation linéaire aux bénéfices est celle qui en occasionne le plus. Il n'existe pas de différence significative entre la structure salariale individuelle favorisant la franchise et la structure Groves en ce qui a trait à l'occurrence des déclarations trompeuses directes, mais les déclarations trompeuses indirectes sont beaucoup plus fréquentes dans le cas de la structure salariale individuelle.

Organizations have often been criticized for reliance on a single item of accounting information (e.g., profit) in evaluating performance, because of its incompleteness. We provide theory‐based experimental evidence that under frequently occurring performance‐evaluation conditions (subjective performance evaluation, causal ambiguity, and individual differences in cognitive ability, knowledge, and/or motivation that lead to different interpretations of information), reliance on a single item of accounting information (profit), rather than profit plus additional (e.g., nonfinancial or external) information, can provide two potential benefits which offset the costs of information incompleteness. First, subordinates are more likely to make the management decisions that superiors will evaluate and reward highly—that is, there are fewer coordination failures in management decisions. Second, even after controlling for the presence or absence of coordination failures, subordinates experience less negative surprise about their performance evaluations.

The relation of competition and cost accounting has been the subject of conflicting prescriptions, theories, and empirical evidence. Practitioner literature and textbooks argue that higher competition generally requires more accurate product costing. Theoretical economic analysis, in contrast, predicts that the optimal level of product-costing accuracy is sometimes higher at lower levels of competition. Results of survey research are inconsistent, suggesting a need for further identification of conditions under which higher competition leads to more accurate product costing. This study shows experimentally that individuals' choices of the level of product-costing accuracy depend not only on the current level of competition but also on the previous level of competition — that is, on an interaction between market structure (monopoly, duopoly, and four-firm competition) and market history (increasing versus decreasing competition). In the experiment, subjects decide on the quantity of data to collect at a pre-set price per datum to support more accurate product-cost estimates. Subjects collect the most cost data (i.e., choose the most accurate product costing) in monopoly, collect the least in duopoly, and an intermediate amount in the four-firm market, consistent with the pattern of optimal cost-data collection in Hansen's 1998 model. The process of convergence to the optimum differs significantly across market types and market histories, however. Subjects who begin in four-firm competition adapt more successfully to change than those who begin in monopoly. The lowest levels of decision performance occur when ex-monopolists face their first competitor: they overreact to this first encounter with competition and overspend on cost data.

The relation of competition and cost accounting has been the subject of conflicting prescriptions, theories, and empirical evidence. Practitioner literature and textbooks argue that higher competition generally requires more accurate product costing. Theoretical economic analysis, in contrast, predicts that the optimal level of product‐costing accuracy is sometimes higher at lower levels of competition. Results of survey research are inconsistent, suggesting a need for further identification of conditions under which higher competition leads to more accurate product costing. This study shows experimentally that individuals' choices of the level of product‐costing accuracy depend not only on the current level of competition but also on the previous level of competition — that is, on an interaction between market structure (monopoly, duopoly, and four‐firm competition) and market history (increasing versus decreasing competition). In the experiment, subjects decide on the quantity of data to collect at a pre‐set price per datum to support more accurate product‐cost estimates. Subjects collect the most cost data (i.e., choose the most accurate product costing) in monopoly, collect the least in duopoly, and an intermediate amount in the four‐firm market, consistent with the pattern of optimal cost‐data collection in Hansen's 1998 model. The process of convergence to the optimum differs significantly across market types and market histories, however. Subjects who begin in four‐firm competition adapt more successfully to change than those who begin in monopoly. The lowest levels of decision performance occur when ex‐monopolists face their first competitor: they overreact to this first encounter with competition and overspend on cost data.

An important issue in audit judgment research concerns auditors' use of unaudited book values when making judgments in the presampling phase of the audit. This paper presents a rudimentary model of the auditor's belief revision process with respect to unaudited book values from an audit value estimation perspective. An experiment testing some implications of the model is also presented. The model proposes that the auditor should judge the validity of unaudited book values in the circumstances and use them accordingly when making presampling audit value estimates. The experimental results indicated that the subjects (auditors) used available unaudited book values and that the extent of usage varied over accounts. However, the results also indicated some inaccurate presampling validity judgments which led to overweighting of unaudited book values. Résumé. Une question importante qui préoccupe les chercheurs dans le domaine de la formulation de jugements en vérification a trait à l'utilisation par les vérificateurs de valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans la formulation de jugements au cours de la phase de la vérification précédant l'échantillonnage. Les auteurs présentent un modèle rudimentaire du processus de révision des convictions du vérificateur en ce qui a trait aux valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans une perspective d'estimation de la valeur de vérification. Ils font également état d'une expérience destinée à vérifier certaines des conséquences du modèle. Selon le modèle, le vérificateur devrait juger de la validité des valeurs comptables non vérifiées dans les circonstances et les utiliser en conséquence dans la formation d'estimations de la valeur de vérification avant échantillonnage. Les résultats de l'expérience révèlent que les sujets (vérificateurs) utilisent les valeurs comptables non vérifiées disponibles et que l'étendue de cette utilisation varie avec les comptes. Toutefois, les résultats révèlent aussi l'inexactitude de certains jugements relatifs à la validité antérieure à l'échantillonnage, à la suite desquels une importance trop grande a été accordée aux valeurs comptables non vérifiées.