A Comparison of Risk-Based and Traditional Auditing and their Effect on the Quality of Audit Reports

ABSTRACT: The purpose of the present research was to compare risk-based and traditional auditing and their effect on the quality of audit reports. The sample consisted of 80 senior managers, supervisors, and auditors of Iran’s Audit Organization. A questionnaire rated on the 5-point Likert scale was used to assess the participants’ view on 4 subscales: validity, quality, reliability, and closeness to reality. The results of t-test showed that risk-based auditing creates significantly more valid and more reliable audit reports than traditional auditing. Also it was shown that risk-based auditing is not closer to reality than traditional auditing. It can thus be concluded that risk-based auditing can gain the trust and confidence of the users of audit reports.