A Review of Releaton between Professional Skepticism, Client-Specific Experiences, and Audit Judgments

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D Candidate in Accounting, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of Accounting, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

10.22103/jak.2021.17535.3485

Abstract

Objective: The main purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between professional skepticism and client-specific experience in the auditor's judgment. This study examines the auditor's judgment in several stages of the decision-making process to determine the relationship between each stage. If different levels of auditor professional skepticism (more or less professional skepticism) and client-specific experience (positive, negative, and no experience) affect audit judgments. Prior experience of the client could be due to a positive experience related to the positive characteristics of the client; also it could be a negative experience of the client so that the auditor has a negative view of the client. If the auditor has a negative experience with the client, they may consider the client to be unreliable and this experience may be effective in the auditor's judgment.
 Method: The present study tries to evaluate the effect of independent variables (professional skepticism and client-specific experience) on the dependent variable (auditor judgment) using the experimental method of 2×3.
The population of the study is people working in auditing firms including Assistant Auditor, Auditor, senior auditors, and Supervisor so the data sample of this paper is 155 auditors who were selected by random sampling method.
In this study, an experimental method was applied to measure the professional skepticism, previous client-specific experience, and the extent of their professional judgment. The research method consists of three parts. The first part is the Hurt model (2010) to measure professional skepticism (including 30 questions). After that, individuals are classified into two categories with high professional skepticism and low professional skepticism. The second part is related to the previous client specific, which provides information about the hypothetical client. Here, the sample auditor is divided into three groups, then the first group is given a positive experience, the second group is given a negative experience about the client and the third group as a control group is provided with no information about the client. In this section, people are manipulated based on the positive and negative experiences of the client to evaluate the auditor's judgment.
Finding: In the same situation, People make different judgments and decisions based on their level of professional skepticism. The previous client-specific experience as another variable could affect the level of the auditor's skepticism, judgments, and decisions. In the present study, three indicators of positive experience, negative experience, and control group are used to measure the cognition of the client, and the variable of fraud/error expectations is applied to measure the auditor's judgment. The results of this study showed that the auditor's decisions and judgments are affected by both the level of skepticism of his profession and the previous client experience. According to the first hypothesis, auditors who have a negative experience with the client are more likely to identify the error as fraud. Compared to auditors with a positive experience of the client.
More specifically, a negative experience of the client causes the auditor to find the trustee less trustworthy, which is effective in determining the expectation of fraud/error and ultimately causes the auditor to be more likely to have made the error probably due to fraud rather than an error.
The second hypothesis did not confirm that the level of proffesional skepticism of the affects the auditor's judgment and decisions. This finding approves states that the auditor should neither accept the management's claims nor be distrustful of the management's claims and consider the management to be inaccurate.
The third hypothesis also states that the difference in auditor's judgment affected by previous experiences was significant for auditors with a low level of professional skepticism (low skepticism). In other words, the previous experience of a client has a greater impact on optimistic people (low-level skepticism versus high-level skepticism). When a person is less skeptical, he is expected to trust people more, so these people are more likely to trust the client's statements when they have a positive experience with the client.
 Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the decisions and judgments of the auditor are affected by both the level of skepticism and the client-specific experience. Auditors with low levels of trait skepticism have more trust in the public. Enhancing professional skepticism can be a way to prevent behavioral biases.
Therefore, one method of prevent these behavioral biases is to educate and improve the experience of auditors to increase the level of professional skepticism. if auditors are trained, they can be aware of judgment processes and behavioral biases, which can help enhance their level of professional skepticism. The auditor should be aware that despite the confidence in their judgment, there are specific aspects, errors, and biases that can affect the auditor's performance. The findings stated that what the auditor needs to be trained in, is that they need to learn from their previous mistakes and understand why these errors occurred. Because they may understand their role in bias and its impact on the audit process and avoid future mistakes.

Keywords


اسدی، مرتضی؛ نعمتی، محمد (1393). قضاوت حرفه‌ای در حسابرسی. حسابدار رسمی، 27، 43-33.
تحریری، آرش، پیری سقرلو، مهدی (1395). درک حسابرسان از مفهوم تردید حرفه‌ای در کار حسابرسی. بررسی‌های حسابداری و حسابرسی، 23(1)، 135-117.
حاجیها، زهره، گودرزی، احمد، فتاحی، زهرا (1392). ارتباط ویژگی‌های تردید حرفه‌ای حسابرسان و قضاوت و تصمیم‌گیری آن‌ها. حسابداری مدیریت، 4، 59-43.
حسینی، سید حسین، نیکو مرام، هاشم، رضایی، علی‌اکبر (1394). تبیین مؤلفه‌های تأثیرگذار بر تردید حرفه‌ای حسابرسان با تکیه بر ابعاد فردی. حسابداری مدیریت، 25، 27-13.
رحیمیان، نظام‌الدین؛ هدایتی، علی (1392). عوامل مؤثر بر اظهارنظر حرفه‌ای حسابرسان. حسابدار رسمی، 24، 86-77.
کده، مریم؛ سالاری، علی (1390). تأثیر ویژگی‌های کیفی قضاوت بر قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرسان. حسابرس، 54، 128-128.
رؤیایی، رمضانعلی؛ یعقوب نژاد، احمد؛ آذین فر، کاوه (1393). ارتباط بین تردید حرفه‌ای و قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرسان مستقل. پژوهش‌های حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی (پژوهشنامه حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی)، 6(22)، 95-67.
قاسمی نژاد، احسان؛ بنی‌مهد، بهمن؛ بشکوه، مهدی (1400) تأثیر ویژگی رفتاری فرصت طلبی بر تردیدحرفه ای حسابرسان مستقل: آزمونی از نظریه روانشناسی شخصیتی. مجله دانش حسابداری، 2(10)، 89-68.
غلامرضایی، محسن؛ حسنی، محمد (1398). تأثیر اختلالات شخصیت بر تردید حرفه‌ای حسابرسان مستقل. مجله دانش حسابداری، 10(2)، 76-43.
مهرانی، ساسان؛ حساس یگانه، یحیی؛ ابویی اردکان، محمد؛ گنجی، حمیدرضا (1398). طراحی الگو تردید حرفه‌ای حسابرسی مبتنی بر نظریه مبنایی. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، ۷۶، ۳۸-۵.
ولیان، حسن، صفری گرایلی، مهدی (1397). ارائه الگویی برای درک تردید حرفه‌ای حسابرسان با رویکرد تحلیل محتوا. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 25، 33-11.
References
Agarwalla, S.K., Desai, N., Tripathy, A. (2017). The impact of self-deception and professional skepticism on perceptions of ethicality. Advances in accounting, 37, 85-93.
Asadi, M & Nemati, M. (2014). Professional judgment in auditing: Charter Accountant Jurnal, 27(1), 33-43 [In Persian].
Beasley, M.S., Carcello, J.V., Hermanson, D.R. (2001). Top 10 audit deficiencies. Journal of Accountancy, 19(1), 7-63.
Beasley, R.M. (2013). Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 569-598.
Bell, T.B., Peecher, M.E., Solomon, I. (2005). The 21st century public company audit: Conceptual elements of KPMG’s global audit methodology, KPMG.
Bierstaker, J., Bedard, J., Biggs, S. (1999). The role of problem representation shifts in auditor decision processes in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18(1), 28-57.
Bierstaker, J.L., Wright, S. (2001). A research note concerning practical problem‐solving ability as a predictor of performance in auditing tasks. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 13(1), 49-62.
Brazel, J.F., Gimbar, C., Maksymov, E.M., Schaefer, T.J. (2019). The outcome effect and professional skepticism: A replication and a failed attempt at mitigation. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 31(2), 135-143.
Cade, M., Salari, A. (2011). The impact of qualitative characteristics of judgment on auditors' professional judgment. Journal of Auditor, 54(3), 128-149 [In Persian].
Carmichael, D., Craig, J.Jr. (1996). Proposal to say the ‘F’ word in auditing standards. The CPA Journal, 66(6), 22-39.
Carpenter, T., Reimers, J. (2011). The effect of a partner’s emphasis on professional skepticism on auditors’ fraud judgments. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract¼1068942.
Carpenter, T., Reimers, J.L. (2009). Professional skepticism: the effects of a partner’s influence and the presence of fraud on auditors’ fraud judgments and actions. Available at SSRN 1068942.
Ciołek, M. (2017). Professional skepticism in auditing and its characteristics. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 474, 33-40.
Copeland, C. (1996). Professional skepticism. Business Credit, 98(8), 37-40.
Cushing, M.G. (2000). The association between auditor litigation and abnormal accruals. The Accounting Review, 76(1), 111-126.
Fatmawati, D., Fransiska, I.P. (2018). Does accounting education affect professional skepticism and audit judgment? Journal Pengurusan (UKM Journal of Management), 52, 1-21.
Ghasemi Nejad, E., Bani Mahd, B., Bashkooh, M. (2021). Effect of opportunistic behavioral characteristics on the professional skepticism of independent auditors: The power of personality psychology theory. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 2(1), 68-89 [In Persian].
Gholamrezaee, M., Hassani, M. (2019). The effects of personality disorder on auditors' professional skepticism. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 10(2), 43-76 [In Persian].
Hajiha, Z., Goodarzi, A., Fattahi, Z. (2013). Relationship between the characteristics of auditors' professional skepticism and their judgment and decision-making. Management Accounting, 4(1), 43-59 [In Persian]
Hosseini, S., Niko Maram, H., Rezaei, A. (2015). Explaining the components affecting auditors' professional skepticism based on individual dimensions. Journal of Management Accounting, 25(1), 13-27 [In Persian].
Huang, Q. (2021). Do critical audit matter disclosures impact investor behavior? Ph.D Dissertation, Columbia University.
Hurtt, R.K. (2010). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1), 149-171.
Janssen, S., Hardies, K., Vanstraelen, A., Zehms, K.M. (2020). Professional skepticism traits and fraud brainstorming quality. Available at: http://ssrn.com/.
Kutner, M.H., Nachtsheim, C.J., Neter, J. (2004). Applied linear regression models. 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York.
Libby, R., Luft, J. (1993). Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation, and environment. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 18(5), 425-450.
Mehrani, S., Hasas Yeganeh, Y., Aboui Ardakan, M., Ganji, H. (2019). Designing an auditing professional skepticism model based on basic theory, Accounting Knowledge and Management Auditing, 76, 5-38 [In Persian].
Nechel, M. (2000). The role of problem representation shifts in auditor decision processes in analytical procedures. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 8(2), 1-16.
Nelson, M.W. (2009). A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. Auditing: a journal of practice & theory, 28(2), 1-34.
Noviyanti, S., Winata, L. (2015). The role of "tone at the top" and knowledge of fraud on auditors’ professional skeptical behavior. Contemporary Management Research, 11(1), 55-74.
PCAOB Release No. 2008-008 (2008). Report on the PCAOB’s 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007 Inspections of Domestic Annually Inspected Firms. Available at: http://pcaobus.org/ Inspections/Documents/2008_12-05_Release_2008-008.pdf (accessed December 12, 2011).
Peecher, M. (1996). The influence of auditors’ justification processes on their decisions: a cognitive model and experimental evidence. Journal of Accounting Research, 34(1), 125-140.
PENG, S. (2017). Theory, methods and meaning of expectation theory. Scientia Sinica Mathematica, 47(10), 1223-1254.
Popova, V. (2013). Exploration of skepticism, client‐specific experiences, and audit judgments. Managerial Auditing Journal, 28(2), 140-160.
Pratama, B., Ali Ahmad, Z., Innayah, M. (2019). Obedience pressure, professional ethics, attitude of skepticism and independency towards audit judgment. Journal of Accounting Science, 2, 141-149.
Pretnar Abičić, S. (2014). Professional skepticism of auditors and risk of fraudulent financial reporting. Journal of Accounting and Management, 4(1), 1-16
Quadackers, L., Groot, T., Wright, A. (2009). Auditors' skeptical characteristics and their relationship to skeptical judgments and decisions. Available at: http://ssrn.com/1478105.
Rahimian, N., Hedayati, A. (2013). Factors affecting the professional opinion of auditors. Journal of Certified Public Accountant, 24(1).77-86 [In Persian].
Robertson, J.C. (2010). The effects of ingratiation and client incentive on auditor judgment. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 22(2), 69-86
Rose, J.M. (2007). Attention to evidence of aggressive financial reporting and intentional misstatement judgments: Effects of experience and trust. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 19(1), 215-229.
Royaee, R., Yaqub Nejad, A., Azinfar, K. (2004). The relationship between professional skepticism and the professional judgment of independent auditors. Financial Accounting and Auditing Research (Financial Accounting and Auditing Financial Research), 6(22), 67-95 [In Persian].
Shaub, M. (1996). Trust and suspicion: the effects of situational and dispositional factors on auditors’ trust of clients. Behavioral Research in Accounting, (8)1, 154-174.
Shaub, M., Lawrence, J. (1996). Ethics, experience and professional skepticism: a situational analysis. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 8(1), 57-124.
Tahriri, A., Piri Saqerloo, M. (2015). Auditors' understanding of the concept of professional skeptisicm in auditing. Accounting and Auditing Reviews, 23(1), 117-135 [In Persian].
Toba, Y. (2011). Toward a conceptual framework of professional skepticism in auditing. Waseda Business & Economic Studies, 47(2), 83-116.
Valian, H., Safari Graili, M. (2017). Providing a model for understanding the professional skepticism of auditors with a content analysis approach. Accounting Knowledge and Management Auditing, 25(1), 11-28 [In Persian].
Westermann, K.D., Cohen, J., Trompeter, G. (2014). Professional skepticism in practice: an examination of the influence of accountability on professional skepticism. Working Paper, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, Boston College, and University of Central Florida.