Auditors’ Skeptical Characteristics and Their Relationship to Auditors' Judgments and Decisions

Subject Areas : Management Accounting

زهره  حاجیها ¹ (ندارد)
احمد  گودرزی ² (ندارد)
زهرا  فتاحی ³ (ندارد)

Received: 2013-05-05 Accepted : 2013-11-06 Published : 2014-03-13

Keywords: Professional Skepticism, Interpersonal trust, Suspension of judgment, Locus of&#x0D, &#x0D, control, judgment and taking decision b,

Abstract :

The goal of this study is to consider the features of auditors’ skepticism and their relationwith judging and taking decision. The studies in past showed that obtaining insight aboutfeatures of skepticism can play an important role in judge and taking decision. Statisticalpopulation is consisted of auditors in Auditing Organization and firms which are member ofCertified Public Accountants' Association. Sample was chosen randomly. The sampleconsisted of 100 auditors with different organizational job groups. Method of research wasdescriptive–measurement. We used questionnaires to measure the variables and statistic PLStest was in order to analyze data.Results of the study indicated that features of skepticism(Interpersonal trust, Suspension of judgment, Locus of control ، Professional skepticism) areeffective for judging and taking decision. But the most influential is Locus of control and ifthe attention to that is increased, the quality of judging and taking decision will also beincreased.

References:

فهرست منابع
انجمن حسابداری آمریکا، ( 1379 )، بیانیه مفاهیم 
بنیادی حسابرسی، ترجمه دکتر علی نیکخواه آزاد،
انتشارات سازمان حسابرسی.
پور افکاری نصراله، ( 1385 )، فرهنگ جامع 
روانشناسی و روانپزشکی، انتشارات فرهنگ
معاصر، تهران .
،( حساس یگانه یحیی، مداحی آزاده، ( 1388 
اثربخشی فرآیندهای حسابرسی در کشف
اشتباهات و تحریف های با اهمیت در صورتهای
مالی، پژوهش نامه حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی،
. 49- پاییز ،صص 76
رحیمیان نظام الدین، ( 1384 )، قضاوت و تصمیم 
گیری در حسابرسی، مجله حسابدار رسمی، دی
.7- ماه، صص 10
کده مریم و سالاری علی، ( 1390 )، تاثیر 
ویژگیهای کیفی قضاوت بر قضاوت حرفه ای
حسابرسان، مجله حسابرس، شماره 154 ، صص
. 1-4
،( کمیته تدوین استانداردهای حسابداری، ( 1388 
استاندارد حسابرسی شماره 200 ، انتشارات
سازمان حسابرسی.
مهام کیهان، تاثیر ویژگیهای حسابرس بر قضاوت 
حرفه ای، حسابدار رسمی، شماره سوم، زمستان
.43 - 1383 ، صص 46
،( امیر اصلانی ،حامی، والاس، ای، وندا، ( 1381 
نقش اقتصادی حسابرسی در بازارهای آزاد و
بازارهای تحت نظارت، ترجمه حامی امیر
اصلانی، انتشارات سازمان حسابرسی.
یعقوب نژاد احمد و رویایی رمضانعلی و کاوه 
آذین فر، ( 1391 )، ارتباط بین شاخص های مکتب
تردید گرایی و کیفیت حسابرسی ، حسابداری
.25- مدیریت ،شماره چهاردهم ،پاییز ،صص 35
 Anugerah, R. Nelly Sari, R. Frostiana, R.
2011. The Relationship between Ethics,
Expertise, Audit Experience, Fraud Risk
Assessment and Audit Situational Factors
and Auditor Professional Skepticism.
Department of Accounting, Faculty of
Economics, Universities INDONESIA. Bailey, Charles D. Daily, Phillips.2005. A
Study of Kruglanski Need for Closure
Construct and Its Implications for Judgment
and Decision Making in Accounting and
Auditing.
 Bell,T.B.,M.E.Peecher,and Thomas H.
2011, The 21stCentury Public Company
Audit .New Yourk, NY:KPMG LLP.PP357-
381
 Benston, G.J., and A.L. Hartgraves. 2002.
Enron: What Happened and What We Can
Learn From It. Journal of Accounting and
Public Policy: 105-127.
 Chin, w. w. 1998, Issues and opinion on
structural equation modeling, MIS
Quarterly, 22, 1, pp. 7-16
 Hurtt, R.K. 2007. Professional Skepticism:
An Audit Specific Model and Measurement
Scale. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and
Theory. Vol. 29, No. 1, 2010,pp: 149-171.
 Hurtt, R. K. 2010. Development of a scale
to measure professional skepticism.
Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory
29 (1): 149-171.
 Hurtt, RK. 1999. Skeptical about
Skepticism: Instrument Development and
Experimental Validation. Disertation, David
Eccles school of Business, The University
of Utah.
 Hurtt, R. K., M. Eining, and R. D. Plumlee.
2008. An experimental examination of
professional skepticism. Working Paper.
Available at SSRN:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1140267.
 Knechel, W. Robert 2000. Behavioral
Research in Auditing and Its Impact on
Audit Education. Issues in Accounting
Education, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. 695-712.
 Kruglanski A.W., and I. Ajzen. 1983. Bias
and Error in Human Judgment. European
Journal of Social Psychology pp: 1-44.
 McMillan, J.J., and R.A. White. 1993.
Auditors' Belief Revisions and Evidence
Search: The Effect of Hypothesis Frame,
Confirmation and Professional Skepticism.
The Accounting Review 68: 443-465.
 Nelson, M. 2009. A Model and Literature
Review of Professional Skepticism in
Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory
28(2)pp: 1 - 34.
 Peecher, M.E. 1994. Consequentiality,
Justification and Auditors’ Decision
Processes: A Theoretical Framework and
Two Experiments. PhD thesis. University of
Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. UMI, order
number 9503293.
 Quadackers, L.M., T.L.C.M. Groot and A.
Wright. 2009. Auditors’ Skeptical
Characteristics and Their Relationship to
Skeptical Judgments and Decisions.
Working paper. VU University Amsterdam.
 Rotter, J.B. 1967. A New Scale for the
Measurement of Interpersonal Trust. Journal
of Personality pp: 651-66.
 Shaub, M.K., and J.E. Lawrence. 1999.
Differences in Auditors' Professional
Skepticism Across Career Levels in The
Firm. Advances in Accounting Behavioral
Research 2, pp: 61 -83.
 Vogel,J. 2010.Bonjour on explanation and
skepticism, Studies in History and
Philosophy of Science 41,pp413-421