Based on the domestic and foreign literature，it can be concluded that few studies have focused on improving the quality of audit judgment and eliminating the impact of audit judgment biases from the perspective of various decision strategies.Therefore，we conducted an experiment incorporating behavioral decision theories to examine the influence of auditors’ experience and decision strategies on the contiguity effect in audit judgment biases.In order to guide the preferences for different decision strategies，regulatory focus theory was also adopted.Results show that in complicated audit judgment，analytical decision making reduce the contiguity effect compared with the intuitive decision making.Meanwhile，auditors’ experience functions as a moderator of the documented relationship.Specifically，analytical decision making is more capable of weakening the contiguity effect when adopted by auditors with less experience，while auditors with more experience are barely affected by the contiguity effect，regardless of the decision strategy they adopt（intuitive or analytical），and the judgment they make using intuitive decision making are relatively steady.Overall，it can be drawn that experience sharing in audit teams，quality inspection and risk control of accounting firms effectively deter the contiguity effect in audit judgment and enhance audit judgment quality.