The article Why Good Accountants do Bad Audits referred to an experiment where two people were given
Question:
The article "Why Good Accountants do Bad Audits" referred to an experiment where two people were given the same information about a motorcycle accident. One person was then assigned to pay the role of the defendant, and one was assigned the role of plaintiff. Which of the follwing were the results of the study? (select all that apply)
Paying the participants for more accurate estimates did not result in a much smaller difference between the two parties estimates of a judgement.
The parties expecations about the amount the judge would order changed signiicantly when they were each required to write an essay arguing the other side's point of view.
The difference between the parties expected judgments were not good predictors of the liklihood of a negotiated settlement.
The parties had similar expectations about what amount the judge would order.
Expert Answer:
The question is based on a famous article Why Good Accountants do Bad Audits In order t... View the full answer
