Investigating the Effectiveness of the Auditor Information Foraging Behavior Theory on Professional Auditor's Perception Based on Rough Theory

Subject Areas : Management Accounting

Mohammadreza Abdoli ¹ (Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran)
Hasan Valiyan ² (Department of Management and Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Gorgan Branch)
Mohadeseh Bigomjalali ³ (Ph.D. Student of Accounting, Islamic Azad University, Shahroud Branch)
Mehran Orooyee ⁴ (Department of management, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University)

Received: 2018-10-09 Accepted : 2018-11-24 Published : 2020-09-22

Keywords: Auditor Information Foraging B, Professional Auditor's Percept, Rough Theory,

Abstract :

The purpose of this research is investigating the effectiveness of the auditor information foraging behavior theory on professional auditor's perception based on rough theory. auditor information foraging behavior theory by creating two valuable approach and cost approach, to measure the difference between the Auditors' approach to gathering information. The method of this combined research based on the adaptation of theoretical foundations through the critical evaluation method, as well as Delphi analysis to confirm the indices, and finally the Rough analysis and the theory of gray, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of a value-based approach and cost-based approach based on the theory of information exploration of auditors. The study was conducted in the period of one year, 10 of Associate Professor of university in the fields of accounting and financial behavior different steps in the study. The results of the study showed that professional maturity, professional identity and professional career path of auditors were the most frequent in the investigated research, which was a determining factor in the professional perception of auditors. Among the 22 identified indicators of the components, 18 indicators were considered as Delphi approved indicators, which were identified by panel decision making matrix, two indicators of professional skepticism and perceived conflict of interest as two Professional Identity Index was the most effective indicator of professional perception of auditors. Also, based on the analysis of Gray Vocator theory, the value-based approach is considered as the most important priority of the information exploration theory of auditors based on the auditor's perception of the profession, which indicates that auditors have a prioritized value for collecting information based on their professional capabilities. Knowing and collecting information and tracing business information about cost and time, have more value in audit quality.

References:

*      اسدی، مرتضی.، نعمتی، محمد. (1393). قضاوت حرفه ای در حسابرسی، فصلنامه حسابداررسمی، شماره 27، پیاپی 39.

*      اعرابی، سیدمحمد.، فیاضی، مرجان. (1389). استراتژی پژوهش کیفی در حوزه مدیریت، فصلنامه راهبرد، 54(1): 225-242.

*      پزشکیان، سید‌علیرضا.، حسینی ازان اخاری، مهدی. (1396). بررسی رابطه مدت تصدی حسابرس با کیفیت حسابرسی، دانش حسابرسی، ۱۷ (۶۷): ۲۳۵-۲۶۴

*      حیرانی، فروغ.، وکیلی فرد، حمید رضا.، رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون. (1396). حرفه‌ای‌گرایی و قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرس. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 6(22): 1-12.

*      رجبی، پونه.، شیرازیان، زهرا. (1396). بررسی تأثیر ویژگی‌های شغلی بر رشد مسیر‌شغلی و قابلیت‌های تطبیق با آن، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی دانشگاه جامع امام حسین (ع)؛ سال نهم، شماره 4، پیاپی 30، زمستان، 107-126.

*      فهیم‌نیا، فاطمه. (1396). بررسی و مقایسه ویژگی‌های رابط کاربر پایگاه‌های اطلاعاتی Elsevier،Springer ، از دیدگاه کاربران در دانشگاه تهران. تعامل انسان و اطلاعات، ۱(۱): 21-42.

*      رهنورد، فرج اله.، خلیل پور تیلمی، سمیه. (1394). سنجش بلوغ سازمانی بر‌اساس مدل اِرل، فصلنامه مدیریت توسعه، دوره 28، بهار، شماره 1، پیاپی 91، 101-116.

*      سعیدی گراغانی، مسلم.، ناصری، احمد. (1396). تفاوت‌های فردی و قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرس. پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی، 9(36): 111-130.

*      شمس زارع، میلاد.، طهماسبی، رضا.، یزدانی، حمیدرضا. (1397). ارزیابی بلوغ فرآیندهای مدیریت منابع انسانی براساس مدل فیلیپس، فصلنامه پژوهش‌های مدیریت منابع انسانی دانشگاه جامع امام حسین (ع)، سال دهم، شماره 1، پیاپی 31، بهار، 75-100.

*      گودرزی، سعید.، حاجیها، زهره. (1395). رابطۀ ویژگی‌های شخصیتی با شکل گیری قضاوت اخلاقی، فصلنامه اخلاق در علوم و فنّاوری، سال دوازدهم، شماره 4، 1-6.

*      ملانظری، مهناز.، اسماعیلی کیا، غریبه. (1393). شناسایی ویژگی‌های روان شناختی اثرگذار بر مهارت حسابرسان در انجام قضاوت‌های حسابرسی، فصلنامه بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، دوره 21، شماره 4، زمستان، 505-526.

*      موسوی شیری، محمود.، صالحی، مهدی.، احمد نژاد، محمد. (1394). بررسی ارتباط تعهد حرفه‌ای و تعهد سازمانی حسابرسان با رفتار حسابرسی ناکارآمد، فصلنامه پژوهش حسابداری و حسابرسی، سال 8، شماره 3، 1-26.

*      Abarca, N., and E. Fantino. 1982. Choice and foraging. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 38 (2): 117–123. doi:10.1901/jeab.1982.38-117

*      AlShathry, O. (2016) "Business process management: a maturity assessment of Saudi Arabian organizations", Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 22 Issue: 3, pp.507-521, https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-07-2015-0101

*      Cassell, C. A., Giroux, G. A., Myers, L. A., & Omer, T. C. (2012). The effect of corporate governance on auditor-client realignments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 31(2), 167-188.

*      Diaz, J., Martin, G, W., Thomas, W, B. (2017). Financial Reporting Quality and Auditor Locality Contagion, A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(4): 71-87.

*      Bucaro, A, C. (2018). Enhancing auditors' critical thinking in audits of complex estimates, Accounting, Organizations and Society, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2018.06.002

*      Quick, R., Schmidet, F. (2018). Do audit firm rotation, auditor retention, and joint audits matter? – An experimental investigation of bank directors' and institutional investors' perceptions, Journal of Accounting Literature, 41: 1-21.

*      Christensen, B. E., R. J. Elder, and S. M. Glover. 2015. Behind the numbers: Insights into large audit firm sampling policies. Accounting Horizons 29 (1): 61–81. doi:10.2308/acch-50921

*      Nurunnabi, M. (2017).  Auditors’ perceptions of the implementation of International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) in a developing country", Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, Vol. 7 Issue: 1, pp.108-133, https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-02-2015-0009

*      Commerford, B., Hatfield, R., Houston, R., Mullis, C. (2017). Auditor Information Foraging Behavior, The Accounting Reviwe, Vol. 92, No. 4: 145-160.

*      Dennis, Sean A. and Johnstone, Karla M. (2016). Contemporary Insights from a Fraud Brainstorming Field Survey. Accounting Horizons, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2746546 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2746546

*      DeZoort, F. T., and A. T. Lord. 1997. A review and synthesis of pressure effects research in accounting. Journal of Accounting Literature 19: 28–85

*      Diaz, M, Ch., Loraas, T, M., Apostolou, B. (2017). How do mentoring rewards influence experienced auditors?, The British Accounting Review, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2017.09.009

*      DiClemente, D. F., and D. A. Hantula. 2003. Optimal foraging online: Increasing sensitivity to delay. Psychology and Marketing 20 (9): 785–809. doi:10.1002/mar.10097

*      Elder, R. J., A. D. Akresh, S. M. Glover, J. L. Higgs, and J. Liljegren. 2013. Audit sampling research: A synthesis and implications for future research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 32 (Supplement 1): 99–129. doi:10.2308/ajpt-50394

*      Hall, T., A. Higson, B. Pierce, K. Price, and C. Skousen. 2012. Haphazard sampling: Selection biases induced by control listing properties and the estimation consequences of these biases. Behavioral Research in Accounting 24 (2): 101–132. doi:10.2308/bria-50132

*      Harding, N., & Trotman, K. T. (2017). The Effect of Partner Communications of Fraud Likelihood and Skeptical Orientation on Auditors' Professional Skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36(2), 111-131. doi: 10.2308/ajpt-51576

*      Hirst, D. E., and L. Koonce. 1996. Audit analytical procedures: A field investigation. Contemporary Accounting Research 13 (2): 457–486. doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.1996.tb00511.x

*      Pöppelbuß, J. et al., (2014). Maturity Models in Information Systems Research: Literature Search and Analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 29, pp.505–532.

*      Liu, C. L., & Lai, S. M. (2012). Organizational complexity and auditor quality. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(4), 352-368

*      MacArthur, R. H., and E. R. Pianka. 1966. On optimal use of a patchy environment. American Naturalist 100 (916): 603–609. doi:10.1086/282454.

*      Messier, W. F., S. M. Glover, and D. F. Prawitt. 2014. Auditing and Assurance Services: A Systematic Approach. Ninth edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

*      Pawlak, Z. (1982). Rough sets, International Journal of Computer and Information Science, Vol. 11, No. 5. Pp341–356

*      Peecher, M. E. 1996. The influence of auditors’ justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 34 (1): 125–140. doi:10.2307/2491335

*      Peecher, M. E. 1996. The influence of auditors’ justification processes on their decisions: A cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research 34 (1): 125–140. doi:10.2307/2491335

*      Pirolli, P. 2007. Information Foraging Theory: Adaptive Interaction with Information. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195173321.001.0001

*      Pirolli, P., and S. K. Card. 1999. Information foraging. Psychological Review 106 (4): 643–675. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.4.643.

*      Rajala, A. K., and D. A. Hantula. 2000. Towards a behavioral ecology of consumption: Delay-reduction effects on foraging in a simulated Internet mall. Managerial and Decision Economics 21 (3-4): 145–158. doi:10.1002/mde.979

*      Resnikoff, H. L. 1989. The Illusion of Reality. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3474-6

*      Schneider, A. (2015). Does information about auditor switches affect investing decisions?, Research in Accounting Regulation, 34; 1-6.

*      Stephens, D. W., and J. R. Krebs. 1986. Foraging Theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

*      Trompeter, G., and A. Wright. 2010. The world has changed—Have analytical procedure practices? Contemporary Accounting Research 27 (2): 669–700. doi:10.1111/j.1911-3846.2010.01021.x

*      Willett, C., and M. Page. 1996. A survey of time budget pressure and irregular auditing practices among newly qualified UK chartered accountants. British Accounting Review 28 (2): 101–120. doi:10.1006/bare.1996.0009

*      Zhai, L.Y., Khoo, L.P., Fok, S. C. (2002). “Feature extraction using rough set theory and generic algorithms an application for the simplification of product quality evaluation,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, 43(4): 661-676

*      Trotman, K, T., Bauer, T, D., Humphreys, K, A. (2015). Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research, Accounting, Organizations and Society. 47(2): 56-72

*      Zhu, G.N., Hu, J., Qi, J., Gu, C. C. & Peng, Y. H. (2015). An integrated AHP and VIKOR for design concept evaluation based on rough number. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 29(3): 408-418.