胡志偉、彭昭英、沈永正與楊金龍,民國78年。「常用中文機率詞所代表![new window](/gs32/images/newin.png)
的意義」。中華心理學刊,卷31(1),1-6。
Amer, T., K. Hackenbrack, and M. Nelson. 1994. Between-auditor differences in the interpretation of probability phrases. Auditing : A Journal of Practice and Theory 13(1): 126-136.
--------, --------, and --------. 1995. Context-dependence of auditor’ interpretations of the No.5 probability expressions. Contemporary Accounting Research 12(1): 25-39.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). 1988. Reports on audited financial statements. Statement on Auditing Standards No.58. New York, NY:AICPA.
Asare, S. K. 1992. The auditor’s going-concern decision:interaction of task variables and the sequential processing of evidence. The Accounting Review 67(2): 379-393.
Ashton, A. H., and R. H. Ashton. 1988. Sequential belief revision in auditing. The Accounting Review 63(4): 623-641.
--------, and --------. 1990. Evidence-responsiveness in professional judgment : Effects of positive versus negative evidence and presentation mode. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46: 1-19.
Bamber, E. M., R. J. Ramsay and R. M. Tubbs. 1997. An examination of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model and alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing. Accounting, Organizations and Society 22(3-4): 249-268.
Beaver, W. H. 1991. Problems and paradoxes in the financial reporting of future events. Accounting Horizons(December): 122-134.
Beyth-Marom, R. 1982. How probable is probable? A numerical translation of verbal probability expressions. Journal of Forcasting 1: 257-269.
Brun, W., and K. H. Teigen. 1988. Verbal probabilities : Ambiguous, context-dependent, or both? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 41: 390-404.
Bryant, G. D., and G. R. Norman. 1980. Expressions of probability:words and numbers. The New England Journal of Medicine. 302,411.
Budescu, D. V., and T. S. Wallsten. 1985. Consistency in interpretation of probabilistic phrases. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36: 391-405.
--------, and --------. 1990. Dyadic decisions with numerical and verbal probabilities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 46: 240-263.
--------, and --------. 1995. Processing linguistic probabilities:General principles and empirical evidence. in Busemeyer, J. R., Hestie, R. and Medin, D.(eds), Decision Making from the Perspective of Cognitive Psychology(pp.275-318), New York:Academic Press,1995.
--------, S. Weinberg and T. S. Wallsten. 1988. Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance 14(2): 281-294.
Camerer, C. F., and M. Weber. 1992. Recent developments in modeling preferences : Uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5: 325-370.
Chesley, G. R. 1979. Procedures for the communication in auditors’ working papers. In Behavioral Experiments in AccountingΠ, edited by T. J. Burns. Columbus, OH : College of Administrative Science, The Ohio State University.
--------. 1986. Interpretation of uncertainty expressions. Contemporary Accounting Research 2(2): 179-199.
--------, and H. A. Wier. 1985. The challenge of contingencies : adding precision to probability. CA Magazine(April): 38-41.
Curley, S. P., and J. F. Yates. 1985. The center and range of the probability interval as factors affecting ambiguity preferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 36: 273-287.
Dillard, J. F., N. L. Kauffman and E. E. Spires. 1991. Evidence order and belief revision in management accounting decision. Accounting, Organizations and Society 16(7): 619-633.
Dusenbury, R., and M. G. Fennema. 1996. Linguistic-numeric presentation mode effects on risky option preferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 68(2): 109-122.
Einhorn, H. J., and R. M. Hogarth. 1985. Ambiguity and uncertainty in probabilistic inference. Psychology Review 93(4): 433-461.
--------, and --------. 1986. Decision making under ambiguity. Journal of Business 59(4): S225-S250.
Ellsberg, D. 1961. Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics 75: 643-669.
Emby, C. 1994. Framing and presentation mode efects in professional judgment : auditors’ internal control judgments and substantive testing decisions. Auditing : A Journal of Practice and Theory 13(Supplement): 102-115.
Erev, I., and B. L. Cohen. 1990. Verbal versus numerical probabilites : Efficiency, biases, and the preference paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 45: 1-18.
Fillenbaum, S., T. S. Wallsten, B. L. Cohen, and J. A. Cox. 1991. Some effects of vocabulary and communication task on the understanding and use of vague probability expressions. American Journal of Psychology 104(1): 35-60.
Gonzaley-Vallejo, C. C., I. Erev and T. S. Wallsten. 1994. Do decision quality and preference order depend on whether probabilities are verbal or numerical? American Journal of Psychology 107(2): 157-172.
--------, and T. S. Wallsten. 1992. The effects of communication mode on preference reversal and decision quality. Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18: 855-864.
Harrison, K. E., and L. A. Tomassini. 1989. Judging the probability of a contingent loss : An emprical study. Contemporary Accounting Research 5(2): 642-648.
Hogarth, R. M., and H. J. Einhorn. 1990. Venture teory : A model of decision weights. Management Science 36(7): 780-803.
--------, and --------. 1992. Order effects in belief updating : The belief-adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology 24: 1-55.
Joyce, E. J., and G. C. Biddle. 1981. Anchoring and adjustment in probabilistic inference in auditing. Journal of Accounting Research 19(1): 120-145.
Kahneman, D., and A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory : An analysis of decision under risk. Economitrica 47: 263-291.
Kahn, B. E., and R. K. Sarin. 1988. Modeling ambiguity in decisions under uncertainty. Journal of Consumer Research 15: 265-272.
Kennedy, J. 1993. Debiasing audit judgment with accountability : A framework and experimental results. Journal of Accounting Research 31(2): 231-245.
Kong, A., G. O. Barnett, F. Mosteller, and C. Youtz. 1986. How medical professionals evalute expressions of probability. The New England Journal of Medicine 315(12): 740-744.
Laswad, F., and Y. T. Mak. 1997. Interpretations of probability expressions by New Zealand standard setters. Accounting Horizons 11(4): 16-23.
Leichti, J. L. 1986. How to evaluate inherent risk - and improve your audits. The Practical Accountant (March): 60-64.
Messier, W. F. 1992. The sequencing of audit evidence:Its impact on the extent of audit testing and report formulation. Accounting and Business Research 22(86): 143-150.
--------, and R. M. Tubbs. 1994. Recency effects in belief revision : The impact of audit experience and the review process. Auditing : A Journal of Practice and Theory 13(1): 57-72.
Moxey, L. M., and A. J. Sanford. 1993.Communicating quantities:A psychological perspective. Hove, UK:Erlbaum.
Nakao, M. A., and S. Axelord. 1983. Numbers are better than words : Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. American Journal of Medicine 74: 1061-1065.
Olson, M. J., and D. V. Budescu. 1997. Patterns of preference for numerical and verbal probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 10: 117-131.
Raghunandan, K., R. A. Grimlund, and A. Schepanski. 1991. Auditor evaluation of loss contingencies. Contemporary Accounting Research (Spring): 549-569.
Rapoport, A., T. S. Wallsten, I. Erev, and B. L. Cohen. 1990. Revision of opinion with verbally and numerically expressed uncertainties. Acta Psychologica 74: 61- 79.
Reagan, R. T., F. Mosteller and C. Youtz. 1989. Quantitative meaning of verbal probability expressions. Journal of Applied Psychology 74(3): 433-422.
Reimers, J. L. 1992. Additional evidence on the need for disclosure reform. Accounting Horizons 6(March): 36-41.
--------, S. Wheeler, and R. Dusenbury. 1993. The effect of response mode on auditor’s control risk assessments. Auditing : A Journal of Practice and Theory 12(2): 62-78.
Robertson, W. O. 1983. Quantifying the meanings of words. Journal of the American Medical Association 249(19): 2631-2632.
Schultz, J., and P. M. J. Reckers. 1981. The impact of group processing on selected audit disclosure decisions. Journal of Accounting Research 19(2): 482-501.
Stone, D. N., and W. N. Dilla. 1994. When numbers are better than words : The joint effects of response representation and experience on inherent risk judgments. Auditing : A Journal of Practice and Theory 13(supplement): 1-19.
Teigen K. H. 1988. The language of uncertainty. Acta Psychologica 68: 27-38.
--------, and W. Brun. 1995. Yes, but it is uncertain:direction and communicative intention of verbal probabilistic terms. Acta Psychologica 88: 233-258.
Trotman, K. T., and A. Wright. 1996. Recency effects:task complexity, decision mode, and task-specific experience. Behavioral Research in Accounting 8: 175-193.
Tubbs, R. M., W. F. Messier, Jr. and W. R. Knechel. 1990. Recency effects in the auditor’s belief revision process. Accounting Review(April): 452-460.
Waller, W. S. 1995. Evaluating and improving the accuracy of auditors’ risk assessments. Working paper, University of Arizona.
Wallsten, T. S. 1990. The costs and benefits of vague information. In R. Hogarth (Ed.), Insight in decision making: A tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn, (pp.28-43). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
--------, D. V. Budescu, and I. Erev. 1988.Understanding and using linguistic uncertainties. Acta Psychologica 68: 39-52.
--------, and --------, A. Rapoport and B. Forsyth. 1986. Measuring the vague meanings of probability terms. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General 115: 348-365.
--------, and --------, and R. Zwick. 1993. Comparing the calibratin and coherence of numerical and verbal probability judgments. Management Science 39(2): 176-190.
--------, and --------, R. Zwick, and S. M. Kemp. 1993. Preference and reasons for communicating probabilitic inormation in numerical or verbal terms. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 31: 135-138.
Weber, E. U., and D. J. Hilton. 1990. Contextual effects in the interpretations of probability words:perceived base rate and severity of events. Journal of experimental psychology:Human perception and performance16(4): 781-789.