[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal
Aims& Scopes
Editorial Board ::
Articles archive::
All Issues
Current Issue
Browse by Authors
Browse by Keywords
Publication Ethics::
For Authors::
Guide for Authors
Submission Form
Peer Review Process::
Reviewers Section
Registration::
Registration Form
Site Facilities::
Site map
Search contents
FAQ
Top 10 contents
Inform to friends
Contact us::
Contact Information
Contact us
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: ::
Back to the articles list Back to browse issues page
Providing a Framework for the Dimensions of Auditors' Cognitive Heterogeneity: with a Thematic Analysis Approach and Identifying the Most Effective Dimension Using the Interpretive Structural Modeling Method
Saeed Inanloo1 , Meysam Arabzadeh2 , Mehdi Safari Gerayli3 , Hossein Jabbary4 , Mohammad reza Mohagheghi5
1- Ph.D. Student Department of Accounting, Kas.C., Islamic Azad University, Kashan, Iran. (s.inanlloo@iau.ac.ir)
2- Associate Professor Department of Accounting, Kas.C., Islamic Azad University, Kashan, Iran(corresponding Author) , M.arabzadeh@iaukashan.ac.ir
3- Associate Professor Department of accounting, BG.C., Islamic Azad University, Bandargaz, Iran. safari83@iau.ac.ir
4- Assistant Professor Department of Accounting, Kas.C., Islamic Azad University, Kashan, Iran. H.jabbary@iaukashan.ac.ir
5- Assistant Professor Department of Accounting, Kas.C., Islamic Azad University, Kashan, Iran. Mohammadreza.Mohagheghi@iau.ac.ir
Abstract:   (82 Views)
Cognitive dissonance refers to a mental state resulting from conflicts and inconsistent behaviors. When individuals are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their thought system, they unconsciously resort to perceptual distortion, justification, or denial to reduce internal tension. This defense mechanism, which often leads to cognitive biases, can affect professional decision-making, especially in sensitive areas such as auditing, where objectivity and impartiality are essential. Recognizing this phenomenon is necessary to strengthen objective judgments and reduce systematic errors. Therefore, the present study presents the dimensions of auditors' heterogeneity: with a  thematic analysis approach and identifies the most effective dimension with the interpretive structural modeling method. This study is considered exploratory in terms of methodology and mixed in terms of analysis. Because of the lack of a coherent framework regarding the dimensions of auditors' cognitive heterogeneity, the study attempts to identify these dimensions through thematic analysis using the thematic analysis method based on the analysis of previous research and interviews with several experts. Then, using a simple two-stage Delphi method, the reliability of the identified dimensions was analyzed, and finally, based on interpretive structural modeling, the most influential dimensions of auditors' cognitive heterogeneity were determined based on the opinions of the research experts. The statistical sample of the study includes 14 academic experts and auditing professors who are experts and have professional experience in the field of auditing, as well as members of the Auditing Standards Development Committee, who were selected based on the purposeful sampling method with a snowball approach in 2024. The results of the present study indicate 3 dimensions (overarching themes) for auditors' cognitive heterogeneity, which include conflict in cognitive values, heterogeneity in structural mechanisms, and inhibitory individual mechanisms, as well as the organizing theme of the aforementioned dimensions (cognitive-environmental conflicts, negative cognitive processing, cognitive mental tensions, heterogeneity after decision-making, heterogeneity in career goals, setting unrealistic standards, and impaired autonomy and performance), and 31 basic themes were identified. Also, the findings of interpretive structural modeling show that auditors' cognitive-environmental conflicts are the most influential dimension of auditors' cognitive heterogeneity. The results of this study can help policymakers, standard developers, and legislators to better understand the dimensions and positive and negative consequences of auditor cognitive heterogeneity, concerning strengthening ethical functions; Social and cultural auditors should take action to interact more dynamically with stakeholders and social contexts, and based on that, adopt the necessary incentive policies to encourage audit firms to increase audit quality and thus limit inefficient behaviors in auditing.
Keywords: Cognitive Heterogeneity of Auditors, Psychological Factors, Individual Mechanisms, Audit Quality
     
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2024/12/9 | Accepted: 2025/04/25
References
1. Aguilar, P., I, Correia., J, de Vries., L, Tortora. 2022. Cognitive dissonance induction as an “inoculator” against negative attitudes towards victims. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 16(12): 12715.‌
2. Bidokia, F., Z, Arefmanesh., J, Khaneghah. 2023. The Effect of Goal Orientation on Auditors' Judgment Performance with the Mediating Role of Self-Efficacy. Journal of Social Behavior and Community Health. 4(12):86-126.
3. Brown, V. L., J.L, Gissel., D.G, Neely. 2021. Neural correlates of cognitive dissonance in auditing professionals: An fMRI study. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 30, 100501.
4. Chen, Y., K.J, Wang., S.H, Liu. 2023. How Personality Traits and Professional Skepticism Affect Auditor Quality? A Quantitative Model. Sustainability. 15(7):74-93.
5. Chen, Y., S, Li., Q, Xia., C, He. 2017. The Relationship Between Job Demands and Employees’ Counterproductive Work Behaviors: The Mediating Effect of Psychological Detachment and Job Anxiety. Frontiers in psychology, 8(4): 1890-1898
6. Davydova, A. G., J.P, Sheronova., V.V, Kosonogov., A.N, Shestakova., V.A, Klucharev. 2023. Application of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Studies of Cognitive Dissonance in Decision Making. Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology, 53(2): 247-256.‌
7. De Vos, J., P.A, Singleton. 2020. Travel and cognitive dissonance. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 138: 525-536.‌
8. Eßer, J., D, Flörchinger., M, Frondel., S, Sommer. 2024. Avoiding cognitive dissonance: Experimental evidence on sustainable online shopping (No. 1063). Ruhr Economic Papers.‌
9. Festinger, L. 1957. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.
10. Guest, G., A, Bunce., L, Johnson. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1): 59-82.
11. Guest, G., Namey, E., & Chen, M. (2020). A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research. PloS one, 15(5), e0232076
12. Ham. C., M, Lang., N, Seybert., S, Wang. 2017. CFO narcissism and financial reporting quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 55(5): 1089–1135.
13. Harmon-Jones, E., J, Mills. 2019. An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. Jurnal Sosial Dan Pembangunan, 34(5): 285-301.‌‌
14. Harmon-Jones, E., R, Willardt., C, Harmon-Jones. 2025. Discrete emotions of dissonance. Motivation Science.‌
15. Harmon‐Jones, E., S, Matis.,D.G, Angus., C, Harmon،Jones. 2024. Does effort increase or decrease reward valuation? Considerations from cognitive dissonance theory. Psychophysiology, 14536.‌
16. Hegarty, W. H., H.P, Sims., F, Luthans. 2000. Organizational behavior: Contradictions in accounting and auditing. Journal of AppliedPsychology,65(1):86-3.
17. Hendar, F., D, Harahap. 2023. The influence of time budget pressure, auditor experience, and auditor competence on audit judgment. Kajian Akuntansi. 24(8): 374-387.
18. Hsu, C. C., B.A, Sandford. 2007. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 74(4): 461-476.
19. Kadous, K., S.J, Kennedy., M.E, Peecher. 2008. The effect of quality assessment and directional goal commitment on auditors' acceptance of client-preferred accounting methods. The Accounting،Review,83(3):771793
20. Lawshe, C. H. 1975. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563-575.
21. Maegherman, E., K, Ask., R, Horselenberg., P.J, Van Koppen. 2022. Law and order effects: on cognitive dissonance and belief perseverance. Psychiatry, psychology and law, 29(1): 33-52.‌ ‌
22. Munidewi, I. A. B., U, Ludigdo., A, Djamhuri., W, Andayani. 2024. Role of Affective Neuroscience in Audit Judgement and Decisions Making: A Systematic Literature Review for Auditing Research. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 18(1): 130-147.‌
23. Narsin, H., A, Jaffar. 2021. Examining the impact of personality traits on conflicts between the auditors and clients relationship management: A mediating model approach. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 10(5): 246-271.
24. Northcutt, N., D, McCoy. 2004. Interactive qualitative analysis: A systems method for qualitative research. Sage Publications.
25. Paino, H., A, Thani., S.I, Zulkarnain. 2017. Dysfunctional audit behaviour: The effect of budget emphasis leadership behavior, and effectiveness of audit review. European Journal of Social Sciences, 21 (3): 436-447.
26. Palant, J., A.R, Smith., L.M, Johnson. 2017. Optimal sample sizes in qualitative research: A meta-analysis of saturation points. Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(3): 45-62.
27. Pelepeychenko, L., Y, Zatsnyi., M, Zaitseva. 2021. Cognitive dissonance as factor of influence in American courtroom discourse. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(3): 173-186.‌
28. Ploger, G. W., J, Dunaway., P, Fournier., S, Soroka. 2021. The psychophysiological correlates of cognitive dissonance. Politics and the Life Sciences, 40(2): 202-212.‌
29. Sariçiçek, R. 2023. The Effect of Dark Personality Traits on The Tendency of Accountants Towards Accounting Fraud. OPUS Journal of Society Research. 4(11): 21-43.
30. Shafer, W. E., R. S, Simmons. 2018. Social Responsibility, Machiavellianism, and Tax Avoidance: A Study of Hong Kong Tax Practitioners, Accounting, Auditing andAccountability Journal, 21(5): 695-720.
31. Svanberg, J., P, Öhman. 2016. Auditors' time pressure: does ethical culture support audit quality? Managerial Auditing Journal, 28(7): 572-591.
32. Uebersax, J. S. 2018. Statistical Methods for Rater Agreement.
33. Vaidis, D. C., W.W, Sleegers., F, Van Leeuwen., K.G, DeMarree., B, Sætrevik., R.M, Ross., D, Priolo. 2024. A multilab replication of the induced-compliance paradigm of cognitive dissonance. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 7(1): 251-269.
34. Von der Gracht, H. A. 2012. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 79(8): 1525-1536.
35. Wood, E., S.K, Miller. 2021. Cognitive dissonance and disaster risk communication. Journal of Emergency Management and Disaster Communications, 2(01): 39-56.‌
36. Yahya, A. H., V, Sukmayadi. 2020. A review of cognitive dissonance theory and its relevance to current social issues. MIMBAR: Jurnal Sosial Dan Pembangunan, 36(2): 480-488.‌
37. Zaki, M., E, Elfar. 2023. The impact of partner perfectionism on audit quality: the mediating role of professional skepticism in the Egyptian context. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting. 10(11):125-138.
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to the articles list Back to browse issues page
دوفصلنامه علمی حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری journal of Value & Behavioral Accounting
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.08 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4704