Talk:Audit technology

Untitled
Peer Review I realized that the last peer review I left did not follow this structure. So I combined it to this one.

1. What does the article (or section) do well? I like how it talks about a different topic and something that I am not familiar with. It does a good job explaining what audit technology is in a straightforward and easy to follow manner. I liked how I was able to follow the reading even though I had no prior knowledge on the topic.

2. What changes would you suggest overall? I include some word changes/suggestions at the end.

3. What is the most important thing that the author could do to improve his/her contribution? I would suggest maybe adding something visual to make it more appealing to the eye. Maybe a picture,infographic, graph, or a chart.

4. Did you glean anything from your classmate's work that could be applicable to your own? I like how all the information flowed well, this is something that I have taken into account for my article.

“This article will go over the different ways that Audit Technology is impacting the audit practice as a whole and how it can effect different decision-making thought processes.” - I don’t think that you have to mention this

"The history of information technology in auditing is a pretty short timeline, as information technology has really only begun to improve in the last 20 years.” I would change the “is a pretty short…” —> “HAS a pretty short…”

"Prior to that, audit opinions were made with much less reliable evidence as testing accounts manually was much more tedious and time-consuming” I think it should be “IS much more tedious”

Firms that have the best levels of Technology can charge the highest wages as they can conduct a quality and efficient audit.” Lower case: Technology —> technology

“Other research has gone deeper into the psychological affects of having improved audit technology.” Should be “effects”

“Their are several environmental and personal characteristics that affect the decision-making on the implementation of upgraded audit tools.” Should be “There”

It turns out that the longer the budget length of audit engagement, the better chance an auditor would implement a brand new technology. I don’t think you should mention longer and length so closely because it makes it redundant.

If these environmental factors were already set in stone though before the opportunity to make a decision on the implementation of a new technology, then the auditors individual characteristics would be the driving cause for the decision. This sentence is a bit confusing.

It boils down to whether the auditor is risk-seeking or risk-adverse in nature. I would change “It boils” to “It comes”

The the decision to implement audit technology is rarely in one individual auditors hands. Many times its a firm-wide decision to use a new audit tool, as firms like to keep their audits relatively consistent from client to client. Delete one “the”.

Hope this helps you! - Patricia Ferrer.p (talk) 18:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 May 2020 and 18 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Arings22.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)