Phenomenological Process of Auditors' Perceptual Bias by Strategic Reference Points Matrix

sohbat salahvarzi ¹ ( مدیرعامل )
علی نعمتی ² ( دکتری حسابداری )
Seyyed Abbas Borhani ³ ( Department of Accounting, Qom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran )
Hossein Shirazi ⁴ ( دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد قم )

Submited date : 2024-06-15 Accepted date : 2024-09-16

Keywords: Perceptual Bias, Strategic Reference Points Matrix, Phenomenological,

Abstract :

This study, with the aim of knowing the influencing factors in the occurrence of perceptual error in auditors, through the phenomenological process, tries to create the matrix of strategic reference points as a theoretical structure through content screening and Q analysis, first, to identify the vertical and horizontal axes of the matrix Strategic reference points are based on the content of similar researches. In the second phase, by conducting interviews with empiricists who, due to sufficient experience and knowledge, have had the necessary coexistence with the investigated phenomenon, propositional themes are identified. And by adjusting the content of propositional themes, for the purpose of conceptual clustering, Q analysis scoring checklist is designed and distributed among the participants who are separated in the majority of the focus group, so that each of the verified propositions from the previous stages , be grouped in a cluster. At the end, the final matrix of strategic reference points of auditors' cognitive disorder occurrence areas is provided. The results of the study during 26 interviews indicate the identification of 219 open codes and 25 propositional themes. Also, 25 propositional themes in 4 conceptual clusters of "normative bias contexts"; "Fields of occupational bias"; "Fields of individual bias" and "fields of social bias" are separated from each other. The obtained results indicate the possible occurrence of perceptual errors from the perspective of damage caused by professional epistemology and damage caused by professional valueism, which can have negative consequences cognitively and functionally in the professional work of auditors.

References:

اسدی، فاطمه.، حسینی، سیدحسین.، همتی، بهرام.، بنی‌مهد، بهمن. (1402). بررسی تأثیر قالب‌بندی و استقلال بر قضاوت حسابرسی با تعدیل‌گری تردید حرفه‌ای، پیشرفت‌های حسابداری، 15(2): 43-61.
اشرفی، بختیار.، حاجیها، زهره.، تهرانی، رضا. (1402). طراحی مدل تورش رفتاری حسابرسان با تاکید بر ویژگی‌های فردی و عمومی حسابرس به روش داده بنیاد، دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 12(45): 483-498.
تابش، زهره.، عبدلی، محمد رضا.، یاورپور، هوشنگ. (1399). بررسی اثر هاله‌ای بر کار‌راهه حرفه‌ای حسابرس، تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، 12(45): 89-112.
شیری، اردشیر.، غرابی، نصرت‌السادات. (1399). الگوهای ذهنی مدیران پیرامون برون‌سپاری فعالیت‌های سازمانی در سازمان‌های دولتی با استفاده از روش‌شناسی کیو، مدیریت سازمان‌های دولتی، 9(1): 61-76.
صفری‌گرایلی، مهدی. (1402). مدل‌سازی نقش خطای ادراکی من‌سانی در بلوغ حرفه‌ای حسابرس، تحقیقات حسابداری و حسابرسی، 15(60): 65-84.
طباطبایی حکیم، سیدمحمدرضا.، گرکز، منصور.، عبدلی، محمدرضا. (1401). ارائه الگوی اثرگذاری تورش رفتاری اتکاء و تعدیل بر قضاوت حسابرسان بورس تهران، نشریه اقتصاد و بانکداری اسلامي، 11(۳۸): ۳۶۷-۴۱۲.
عزیزی، یوسف.، سپهری، پطرو.، ایمان‌زاده، پیمان. (1401). تأثیر توانایی‌های شناختی-رفتاری حسابرسان بر پذیرش ریسک حسابرسی. نشریه اقتصاد و بانکداری اسلامي، ۱۱(۴۰): ۳۳۷-۳۵۳.
گنجی، کیانوش.، عرب‌مازار یزدی، محمد.، هشی، عباس.، اثنی‌عشری، حمیده. (1400). شناسایی و مفهوم‌پردازی عوامل موثر بر تمایل خروج حسابرسان از حرفه حسابرسی، پیشرفت‌های حسابداری، 13(2): 269-309.
محمودآبادی، حمید.، رجب‌دری، حسین. (1398). بررسی رابطه خطاهای رفتاری و چرخه عمر با مدیریت سرمایه در گردش، پژوهش‌های روانشناختی در مدیریت، 5(1): 9-47.
نوبخت، یونس. (1397). تحلیل محتوای پژوهش‌های حسابداری رفتاری در ایران، حسابداری مدیریت، 11(39): 99-113.
Albawwat, I & Frijat, Y. (2021). An analysis of auditors’ perceptions towards artificial intelligence and its contribution to audit quality Accounting, 7(4): 755-762.
Anandarajan, A., Kleinman, G. and Palmon, D. (2008). Novice and expert judgment in the presence of going concern uncertainty: The influence of heuristic biases and other relevant factors, Managerial Auditing Journal, 23(4): 345-366.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900810864309 Beck, C. T. (2019). Introduction to phenomenology: Focus on methodology. Sage Publications Berthet, V. (2022). The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals' Decision-Making: A Review of Four Occupational Areas, Front Psychol, 21(1): 87-104.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.802439 Berthet, V. (2022). The Impact of Cognitive Biases on Professionals’ Decision-Making: A Review of Four Occupational Areas, Front Psychol, 12(1): 33-49.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.802439 Cassell, C, A., Dearden, S, M., Rosser, D, M. & Shipman, J, E. (2022). Confirmation Bias and Auditor Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 41(3): 67–93.
https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2020-035 Cassell, C, A., Dearden, S, M., Rosser, D, M. and Shipman, J, E. (2022). Confirmation Bias and Auditor Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 41(3): 67-93.
https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2020-035 Chang, C.J. and Luo, Y. (2021). Data visualization and cognitive biases in audits, Managerial Auditing Journal, 36(1): 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-08-2017-1637 Chen, H., Tan, X. and CAO, Q. (2021). Air pollution, auditors' pessimistic bias and audit quality: evidence from China, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(1): 74-104.
https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-07-2019-0277 Colaizzi, P.F. (1978) Psychological research as a phenomenologist views it. In: Valle, R.S. and King, M., Eds., Existential-Phenomenological Alternatives for Psychology, Oxford University Press, New York, 48-71.
Cory A. Cassell, Stuart M. Dearden, David M. Rosser, Jonathan E. Shipman. (2022). Confirmation Bias and Auditor Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 41(3): 67–93.
https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2020-035 Gendron, Y. (2024). The audit society: opening up a meaningful epistemological agenda, Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 21(1): 7-20.
https://doi.org/10.1108/QRAM-09-2021-0173 Gold, A., Detzen, D., Van Mourik, O., Wallage, Ph. & Wright, A. (2022). Walking the Talk? Managing Errors in the Audit Profession, Contemporary Accounting Research, 39(4): 2696-2729.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12794 Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E., Gonzalo-Angulo, J, A. (2015). Can expertise mitigate auditors’ unintentional biases?, Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 24(3): 105-117.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intaccaudtax.2014.11.002 Johnson, E, N. (1994). Auditor memory for audit evidence: Effects of group assistance, time delay, and memory task, Auditing A Journal of Practice & Theory, 13(1): 37-61.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2012). Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures. In A. Tversky, D. Kahneman, & P. Slovic (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 414–421).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809477.031 Kassem, R. (2023). External auditors’ use and perceptions of fraud factors in assessing fraudulent financial reporting risk (FFRR): Implications for audit policy and practice, Security Journal,
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41284-023-00399-w King, R, R. (2002). An Experimental Investigation of Self-Serving Biases in an Auditing Trust Game: The Effect of Group Affiliation, The Accounting Review, 77(2): 265-284.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.275821 Kleinman, G., Medinets, A. and Palmon, D, A. (2007). Theoretical Model of Cognitive Factors that Affect Auditors' Performance and Perceived Independence, International Journal of Behavioral Accounting and Finance, 1(3): 239-267.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.989044 Koonce, L. (1993). Explanation and counterexplanation during audit analytical review. The Accounting Review, 67(1), 59–76.
Marques, I, S, S., Major, M, J., Da Veiga, M, D, R. (2019). Auditor Independence: A Qualitative Study of the Perceptions of Auditors, International Journal of Accounting And Taxation, 7(1): 76-91.
Mauldin, E, G., Wolfe, Ch, J. (2014). How Do Auditors Address Control Deficiencies that Bias Accounting Estimates?, Contemporary Accounting Research, 31(3): 658-680.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12051 O'Donnell, E. and Schultz, J, J. (2005). The Halo Effect in Business Risk Audits: Can Strategic Risk Assessment Bias Auditor Judgment about Accounting Details?, The Accounting Review, 80(3): 921-939.
https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2005.80.3.921 Olojede, P., Erin, O., Asiriuwa, O. (2020). Audit expectation gap: an empirical analysis. Future Business Journal, 6(2): 10-29.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43093-020-00016-x Parker, L, M., Fogarty, T. (2012). Seeing What You Want to See: Perceptual Biases of Auditors, Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 13(2): 11 - 25
Rautiainen, A., Saastamoinen, J., Pajunen, K. (2023). Auditors’ perceptions of alternative performance measures: alternative truths and professional skepticism, Accounting in Europe,
https://doi.org/10.1080/17449480.2023.2244509 Reinstein, A. and Weirich, T.R. (1996). Testing for bias in the audit committee, Managerial Auditing Journal, 11(2): 28-35.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02686909610107951 Sampet, J., Sarapaivanich, N. and Patterson, P. (2019). The role of client participation and psychological comfort in driving perceptions of audit quality: Evidence from an emerging economy, Asian Review of Accounting, 27(2): 177-195.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-09-2017-0144 Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as Qualitative Research: A Guide for Researchers in Education and the Social Sciences, Third Edition, Teachers College, Columbia University New York and London. Shosha, G. A. (2012). Employment of Colaizzi's strategy in descriptive phenomenology a reflection of a researcher. European Scientific Journal, 8(27), 31-43.
Smith, J., and Kida, T. (1991). Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. Psychological Bulletin. 3, 472–489.
Spinelli, E. (2005). The interpreted world: An introduction to phenomenological psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Subedi, M. (2023). Independent Audit Matters: Mitigation of Auditors’ Independence Issues and Biases. EDPACS, 67(2): 15-23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4220220 Utami, I., Kusuma, I.W., Gudono, G. and Supriyadi, S. (2017). Debiasing the halo effect in audit decision: evidence from experimental study, Asian Review of Accounting, 25(2): 211-241.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ARA-10-2015-0105 Van Landuyt, B, W. (2021). Does emphasizing management bias decrease auditors’ sensitivity to measurement imprecision?, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 88(2): 78-91.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2020.101189 Wedemeyer, Ph, D. (2010). A discussion of auditor judgment as the critical component in audit quality: A practitioner's perspective, International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 7(2): 320–333.
https://doi.org/10.1057/jdg.2010.19 Wilholt, T. (2023). Epistemic interests and the objectivity of inquiry, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 91(1): 86-93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.11.009 Windsor, C. and Warming-Rasmussen, B. (2009). The rise of regulatory capitalism and the decline of auditor independence: A critical and experimental examination of auditors’ conflicts of interests, Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(2): 267-288.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2007.04.003 Zhou, Y., Weber, D.P. & Wen, C. (2024). Selection bias in audit firm tenure research. Review of Accounting Studies, 2(2): 107-138.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11142-023-09787-4