Search

We claim that the missing correspondence between accounting and auditing has come about because auditing's basic philosophical assumptions has not been developed as much as its counterparts in the field of accounting. While fair value accounting represents a socially constructed reality, auditing still seems to be founded in the positivist tradition of evidence theory (e.g. Mautz & Sharaf, 1961; AAA, 1973; Flint, 1988). The remainder of the paper will analyze the missing correspondence between accounting and auditing, problem which has been raised in section one. Firstly, the next section will shortly describe the methodology used for the analysis. Section three will give a brief overview of the historical change in the main accounting paradigm from reporting the truth to reporting in accordance with GAAP and the corresponding changes in the main auditing paradigm from ancient times until modern auditing in the nineteenth century, culminating in ASOBAC. In section four, the developments of the last decade or two are analyzed, more specifically the change in accounting's focus from correspondence with criteria to the social construction of consensus, which can be seen in the change in accounting from the 1990s onwards to the fair value paradigm. It will be argued that auditing has not changed accordingly, and that this missing link between accounting and auditing's ontological focus can cause problems for academics, standard-setters and practitioners. The paper will conclude with these implications and the need for future research. Keywords: accounting, auditing, fair value, historical cost, stewardship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]