Judging the probability of a contingent loss: An empirical study*

Kenneth E. Harrison and Lawrence A. Tomassini

Contemporary Accounting Research, 1989, vol. 5, issue 2, 642-648

Abstract: Abstract. This paper reports the results of research in which experienced auditors interpreted the criteria of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5 (SFAS 5): Accounting for Contingencies. The research focuses on two issues: (1) the nature and degree of consensus in the auditors' interpretations, and (2) the extent to which these interpretations depend upon the type of contingent loss. Forty†five experienced auditors (managers, principals, and partners) from “Big 8†CPA firms responded to a research instrument that elicited their interpretation of SFAS 5 probability criteria. Our analysis focuses upon the thresholds between the “remote†and “reasonably possible†criteria and between the “reasonably possible†and “probable†criteria. Our results indicate: (1) threshold means of 0.16 and 0.68, respectively; (2) more auditor consensus for the first threshold than for the second; (3) the first threshold was significantly lower than indicated by previous research; and (4) the thresholds were generally not dependent upon the type of contingent loss.

Date: 1989
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1989.tb00730.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:coacre:v:5:y:1989:i:2:p:642-648

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Contemporary Accounting Research from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().