[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Editorial Board ::
Articles archive::
Publication Ethics::
For Authors::
Peer Review Process::
Registration::
Site Facilities::
Contact us::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Volume 4, Issue 8 (2-2020) ::
aapc 2020, 4(8): 281-317 Back to browse issues page
Effective Structures modeling on professional ethics of auditing by using interpretive structural modeling from the presspective of profession experts
Mohammad Ramazan Ahmadi 1, Abdolmajid Ahangari2 , Mohsen Salehinia3
1- Assistant Prof, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran, (Corresponding author) , ahamadi_m@scu.ac.ir
2- Associate Prof, Department of Economic, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran.(a_m_ahangari@yahoo.com)
3- Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran. (research@mohsensalehinia.ir)
Abstract:   (8082 Views)
Bankruptcy of inernational companies it has roots to violations of auditing and finally the violations is due to professional ethics decline and ignoring the mission of auditing profession as a self-governing profession.Therefore many structures are impressive on professional ethics of auditing, So this research by undrestanding this issue through interpretive structural modeling is insearch for designing a model based on leveling and segregation effective structures on professional ethics of auditing. Statistical society of research included certified public accountants in 2019 that was used purposive sampling for select the sample. The methodology of the qualitative part based on identifying the structures influencing on professional ethics auditing through content analysis of theorical foundotions, empirical background and performing FUZZY-DELPHI analysis with the participation of 20 expert of audit profession as panel members and also in quantitative part with participatopn of 16 expert of audit profession through establishment self-interactive sructural matrix is seeking structural interpretive modeling. The resaults show that the most fundamental structures affecting the professional ethics of auditing are competition in auditing market, the type and power of corporate governance,the private or non private employer,the size of the employer organization,no compromis due to the employer threat to dismissal auditor,the auditor's financial problems and economy fluctutations sucj as rising exchange rate and inflation.The sructures are associated with envionmental and economic indicator.
Keywords: Professional Ethics of Auditing, Economic Structures, Behavior Structures, Environment Structures, Task Structures and Interpretive Structural Modeling
Full-Text [PDF 362 kb]   (1200 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/07/4 | Accepted: 2019/08/17 | Published: 2020/02/8
References
1. Abdolmohammadi, M. J., & Shanteau, J. (1992). Personal attributes of expert auditors. Organizational Behavior and human decision processes, 53(2), 158-172.‌
2. Ardelean, A. (2013). Auditors’ ethics and their impact on public trust. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 92, 55-60.‌
3. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Macmillan.‌
4. Bangun, Y. K., & Asri, M. (2017). Auditor Ethical Decision Making. Scientific Research Journal.‌
5. Baotham, S., & Ussahawanitchakit, P. (2009). Audit independence, quality, and credibility: effects on reputation and sustainable success of CPAs in Thailand. International Journal of Business Research, 9(1), 1-25.‌
6. Bonner, S. E. (1990). Experience effects in auditing: The role of task-specific knowledge. Accounting Review, 72-92.‌
7. Bonner, S. E., & Lewis, B. L. (1990). Determinants of auditor expertise. Journal of accounting research, 28, 1-20.‌
8. Bouhawia, M. S., Irianto, G., & Baridwan, Z. (2015). The Effect of Working Experience, Integrity, Competence, and Organizational Commitment on Audit Quality (Survey State Owned Companies In Libya). IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance (IOSR-JEF) Volume, 6, 60-67.‌
9. Buchan, H. F. (2004). Public accountants' ethical intentions: extending the theory of planned behavior. State University of New York at Binghamton.‌
10. Choy, A. K., & King, R. R. (2005). An experimental investigation of approaches to audit decision making: an evaluation using systems‐mediated mental models. Contemporary Accounting Research, 22(2), 311-350.‌
11. Cohen, J. R., Pant, L. W., & Sharp, D. J. (2001). An examination of differences in ethical decision-making between Canadian business students and accounting professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(4), 319-336.‌
12. Deconinck, J. B. (2005). the influence of ethical control systems and moral intensity on managers' ethical perceptions and behavioral intentions. Marketing Management Journal, 15(2).‌
13. Elbardan, H., Ali, M., & Ghoneim, A. (2015). The dilemma of internal audit function adaptation: The impact of ERP and corporate governance pressures. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 28(1), 93-106.‌
14. Fernando, M., Dharmage, S., & Almeida, S. (2008). Ethical ideologies of senior Australian managers: An empirical study. Journal of Business Ethics, 82(1),145-155.‌
15. Fleming, M. M. K. (1980). Budgeting practices in large CPA firms. Journal of Accountancy, 149(5), 55.‌
16. Gendron, Y., Suddaby, R., & Lam, H. (2006). An examination of the ethical commitment of professional accountants to auditor independence. Journal of Business Ethics, 64(2), 169-193.‌
17. Gibbins, M., & Swieringa, R. J. (1995). Twenty years of judgment research in accounting and auditing. Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing, 231-249.‌
18. Halim, H. A., Jaafar, H., & Janudin, S. E. (2018). Factors Influencing Professional Judgment of Auditors in Malaysia. International Business Research, 11(11), 119-127.‌
19. Ismail, S., & Yuhanis, N. (2018). Determinants of ethical work behaviour of Malaysian public sector auditors. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 10(1), 21-34.‌
20. Kim, B. P., Murrmann, S. K., & Lee, G. (2009). Moderating effects of gender and organizational level between role stress and job satisfaction among hotel employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4), 612-619.‌
21. Knechel, W. R. (2000). Behavioral research in auditing and its impact on audit education. Issues in accounting education, 15(4), 695-712.‌
22. Kohlberg L (2002). The philosophy of moral development: the nature and validity of moral stages essays on moral development. San Francisco: Harper& Row: 123-137.
23. Lambert, J. C. (1974). Proposed code of professional conduct. Management Accounting, 55, 19-22.
24. Lampe, J. C., Finn, D. W., Gaa, J., & Malley, P. L. (1992). A model of auditors' ethical decision processes; Discussions; Reply. Auditing, 11, 33.‌
25. Lee, Y. T., Stettler, A., & Antonakis, J. (2012). Incremental validity and indirect effect of ethical development on work performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(7), 1110-1115.
26. Libby, R. (1995). The role of knowledge and memory in audit judgment. Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing, 1, 176-206.
27. Mala, R., & Chand, P. (2015). Judgment and Decision‐Making Research in Auditing and Accounting: Future Research Implications of Person, Task, and Environment Perspective. Accounting Perspectives, 14(1), 1-50.
28. Martinson, O. B., & Ziegenfuss, D. E. (2000). Looking at What Influences ETHICAL Perception and Judgment. Management Accounting Quarterly, 2(1).
29. McDevitt, R. K. (2000). A systems approach to identifying the sources of decision influences and their importance to individuals facing ethical dilemmas.‌
30. Messier, W. F. (1995). Research in and development of audit decision aids. Judgment and decision making research in accounting and auditing, 207-228
31. Mirshekary, S, Yaftian, A and Nasirzadeh, F. (2008). “Academic and Business Dishonesty: A Comparison of Iranian and Australian Accounting Students”. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Business Research Conference. University of Technology Sydney.
32. Modarres, A., & Rafiee, A. (2011). Influencing factors on the ethical decision making of Iranian accountants. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(1), 136-144.
33. Muslumov, A. & Aras, G. (2004). The analysis of factors affecting ethical judgment: the Turkish evidence. Conference proceding: Global Business and Technology Association, 2004 International Conference, June 8 to 12, Cape town, South Africa. Unpublished.
34. Muslumov, A., & Aras, G. (2004). The analysis of factors affecting ethical judgements: the Turkish evidence.‌
35. Paino, H., Ismail, Z., & Smith, M. (2014). Modelling dysfunctional behaviour: individual factors and ethical financial decision. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 145, 116-128.
36. Ponemon, L. A. (1993). The influence of ethical reasoning on auditors’ perceptions of management’s competence and integrity. Advances in Accounting, 11(1), 1-29.‌
37. Quadackers, L. (2009). Auditors’ Skeptical Characteristics and Their Relationship to Skeptical Judgments and Decisions, Dissertation Amsterdam , 10,PP. 50-70.
38. Ravi, V., & Shankar, R. (2005). Analysis of interactions among the barriers of reverse logistics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 72(8), 1011-1029.
39. Rest JR (1994). Moral development in the professions. New Jersey: Hillsdale: 78-90
40. Schlachter, P. J. (2002). Organizational influences on individual ethical behavior in public accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(11), 839-853.‌
41. Shanteau, J. (1992). Competence in experts: The role of task characteristics. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 53(2), 252-266.
42. Singh, M. D., Shankar, R., Narain, R., & Agarwal, A. (2003). An interpretive structural modeling of knowledge management in engineering industries. Journal of Advances in Management Research, 1(1), 28-40.
43. Solomon, I., & Shields, M. D. (1995). research in auditing. Judgment and decision-making research in accounting and auditing, 137.
44. Sweeney, J. (1995). The moral expertise of auditors: An exploratory analysis. Research on accounting ethics, 1(2), 213-234.‌
45. Thakkar, J., Deshmukh, S. G., Gupta, A. D., & Shankar, R. (2006). Development of a balanced scorecard: an integrated approach of interpretive structural modeling (ISM) and analytic network process (ANP). International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 56(1), 25-59.
46. 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, 56-72.
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA



XML   Persian Abstract   Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ramazan Ahmadi M, Ahangari A, salehinia M. Effective Structures modeling on professional ethics of auditing by using interpretive structural modeling from the presspective of profession experts. aapc 2020; 4 (8) :281-317
URL: http://aapc.khu.ac.ir/article-1-667-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 4, Issue 8 (2-2020) Back to browse issues page
دوفصلنامه علمی حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری journal of Value & Behavioral  Accounting
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.09 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4666