Abstract
The Theory of Technology Dominance proposes that continued use of intelligent decision aids (IDAs) relates to a decrease in auditors’ decision making skills, or deskilling. Prior research has considered deskilling in terms of auditor declarative knowledge. This research considers deskilling in relation to auditor declarative and procedural knowledge through an extended research model. A novel, rigorous and repeatable qualitative research method using automated text analysis (Leximancer) is developed for the analysis of significant bodies of text. Nineteen senior auditors in three audit offices were interviewed, and the transcripts analyzed. The findings indicate strong support for the hypothesized negative relationships between three constructs (the extent an IDA performs routine and time-intensive tasks, the dependence of an auditor on the IDA, and the auditor’s time with an IDA), and an auditor’s declarative and procedural knowledge. The results indicate avenues for future research, and provide guidance to practitioners in the use of IDAs.
Recommended Citation
Axelsen, Micheal, "Continued use of intelligent decision aids and auditor knowledge: qualitative evidence" (2012). AMCIS 2012 Proceedings. 19.
https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2012/proceedings/AccountingInformationSystems/19
Continued use of intelligent decision aids and auditor knowledge: qualitative evidence
The Theory of Technology Dominance proposes that continued use of intelligent decision aids (IDAs) relates to a decrease in auditors’ decision making skills, or deskilling. Prior research has considered deskilling in terms of auditor declarative knowledge. This research considers deskilling in relation to auditor declarative and procedural knowledge through an extended research model. A novel, rigorous and repeatable qualitative research method using automated text analysis (Leximancer) is developed for the analysis of significant bodies of text. Nineteen senior auditors in three audit offices were interviewed, and the transcripts analyzed. The findings indicate strong support for the hypothesized negative relationships between three constructs (the extent an IDA performs routine and time-intensive tasks, the dependence of an auditor on the IDA, and the auditor’s time with an IDA), and an auditor’s declarative and procedural knowledge. The results indicate avenues for future research, and provide guidance to practitioners in the use of IDAs.