The impact of *experience, industry characteristics, and individual differences on audit risk and the extent of testing decisions: An empirical investigation

The first part of the study examined the effect of industry risk changes on perceived audit risk at the financial statement level and whether these changes depended on individual differences such as experience and tolerance for ambiguity. ^ Forty-eight auditors from two offices of one of the “Big 5” CPA firms participated in this study. The ANOVA results supported the effect of industry risk in the assessment of audit risk at the financial statement level. Higher industry risk was associated with higher perceived audit risk. Tolerance for ambiguity was also significant in explaining the changes in the assessment of audit risk. Auditors with a high tolerance for ambiguity perceived lower audit risk than auditors with a low tolerance for ambiguity. Although ANOVA results did not find experience to be significant, a t-test for experience showed it to be marginally significant and inversely related to audit risk. ^ The second part of this study examined whether differences in perceived audit risk at the financial statement level altered the extent, nature or timing of the planned auditing procedures. The results of the MANOVA suggested an overall audit risk effect at the financial statement level. Perceived audit risk was significant in explaining the variation in the number of hours planned for the total cycle and the number of hours p1anned for the tests of balances and details. Perceived audit risk was not significant in determining the analytical review procedures planned, but assessed inherent risk at the cycle level was significant. The higher the inherent risk the more analytical procedures were planned. Perceived audit risk was not significant in explaining the timing of the procedures, but individual differences were significant. The results showed that experienced auditors and those with a high tolerance for ambiguity were less likely to postpone the performance of the interim procedures or the time at which the majority of audit work would be done. ^

The effects and extent of 1,1,1-trichloroethane vapor concentration exposure on workers during solvent vapor degreasing

This study attempted to determine if an excessive amount of 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane was released into the air, the acute effects of exposure and the cause(s) of excessive use. The types of degreasing equipments which were tested in this study are straight vapor and the vapor spray machines. The instruments utilized to obtain the data for this study are Gastech Haline Detector, Organic Vapor Monitor Badge and Personal Sampling Pump. Readings were taken on three different tanks. The data accumulated by this study were obtained during actual cleaning operation. During testing, increased exposure was detected due to exceeding the rate of removal, downward drafts were blowing right over the top of a degreaser and, in some cases, poor general ventilation caused solvent vapor to be blown out of the tank and into the workers' breathing zone, affecting excessive vapor drag out and solvent loss. The results show that, since the characteristics of solvent 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane are well suited to vapor degreasing requirements, by using proper procedures and maintenance, 1,1,1 - Trichloroethane emission during vapor degreasing can be controlled at levels well below the industrial hygiene standard established by OSHA for safe and healthful conditions.