[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 5, Issue 9 (8-2020) ::
2020, 5(9): 55-79 Back to browse issues page
Developing a qualitative model of auditors 'professional skepticism: A perspective of auditing partners and managers of Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants
Alireza Hasanmaleki1, Mohammadreza Abdoli 2, Ahmad Abdollahi3, Abrahim Abbasi4
1- Ph.D. student of Accounting, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran.(Alireza.h.maleki@gmail.com)
2- Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran. (Corresponding Author) , Mra830@yahoo.com
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, Golestan Higher Education Institution, Gorgan, Iran.(ahmabdollahi@gmail.com)
4- Associate Professor, Alzahra University, Tehran.(abbasiebrahim2000@yahoo.com)
Abstract:   (4683 Views)
Professional skepticism (PS) is one of the key points in audit quality. There are several motivations and barriers to professional skepticism in the audit process. The purpose of this study is to make clear and to compile motivators and effective barriers on auditorschr('39')  PS and to identify its consequences through grounded theory approach that can improve an active and continuous process of PS and thus the result is audit quality. This study is qualitative research. So an interview with 16 individuals, whom associate audit institute and the public managers of Iranian auditors which are chose through purposive sampling approach and Snow Ball approach in 2019. Sampling was continued until saturation of theory in the process of collecting data. To gain validity and reliability of the research, there are some methods used to validate the qualitative research and the model such as: consensus / triangulation, evaluation through members, evaluation based on 10 criteria of acceptability proposed by Strauss and Corbin. Then, the motivators and barriers of PS of auditors in caused situation, in obstacle condition and motivator situation   was analyzed and through noticing  the paradigmatic model of the process of auditorschr('39') PS formation its results include effective consequences (control aspect and Accreditation aspect) and behavioral consequences (economic discipline and response).
Keywords: Keywords: Professional Skepticism (PS), Grounded Theory, Consequences Of Professional Pkepticism.
Full-Text [PDF 234 kb]   (226 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Applicable | Subject: Special
Received: 2019/07/27 | Accepted: 2019/10/10 | Published: 2020/08/22
References
1. Agarwalla, S.K., N. Desai, and A. Tripathy. 2017. The impact of self-deception and professional skepticism on perceptions of ethicality. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adiac.2017.04.002
2. Aschauer, E., Fink, M., Moro, A., Van Bakel-Auer, K., and WarmingRasmussen, B. 2017. Trust and Professional Skepticism in the Relationship between Auditors and Clients: Overcoming the Dichotomy Myth. Behavioral Research in Accounting 29( 1):19-42.
3. Arumrga, Z., Andreas, A. Z,. 2016. The Influence of Ethics, experience and competency towad the quality of auditing with professional auditor skepticism as a Moderating Variable. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 219 (2016): 828 – 832.
4. Austin, A., Carpenter,T. Christ, M., and Nielson,C. 2018. Empowering Auditors to Pursue Fraud during Evidence Evaluation.Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3247783
5. Bowlin, K. O., J. L. Hobson, and M. D. Piercy. 2015. The Effects of Auditor Rotation, Professional Skepticism, and Interactions with Managers on Audit Quality. The Accounting Review: 90( 4): 1363-1393
6. Brazel J.F., and J.Leiby, and T.Schaefer .2018. Do Rewards Encourage Professional Skepticism? Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3111466
7. Brazel J.F., and C. Gimbar, and E. Maksymov. 2018. The Outcome Effect and Professional Skepticism: A Replication and an Attempt at Mitigation. Behavioral Research in Accounting, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3140647
8. Brazel J.F., and T. Schaefer. 2016. Research Insights Auditor Professional Skepticism Part I: Incentives and Time, www.ifac. org .
9. Brazel J.F., and T. Schaefer.2016. Research Insights Auditor Professional Skepticism Part II: Mindset, Prompts and Environment and Contextual Factors, www.ifac.org.
10. Brazel, J. F., Jackson, S. B., Schaefer, T. J., & Stewart, B. W. 2016. The Outcome Effect and Professional Skepticism. The Accounting Review 91(6):1577-1599.
11. Choo, F., and K. Tan. 2000. Instruction, Skepticism, and Accounting Students’ Ability to Detect Frauds in Auditing, THE Journal of Business Education 1:72-87.
12. Curtis R.K., Breaking the Barrier. 2014. An Examination into the Current State of Professional Skepticism, University of Connecticut . Available at: https://opencommons.uconn.edu/srhonors_theses/340
13. Doty, J. R. 2011. What the PCAOB Expects for the Coming Year and Beyond. . Available at: https://pcaobus.org
14. Endrawes, M., & Monroe, G S. 2010. Professional skepticism of auditors: a cross-cultural experiment. School of Accounting Univercity of New South Wales Australia, 1-40.
15. Fatmawati, D., A.Mustikarini, and F.Inneke Puspita. 2018 . Does Accounting Education Affect Professional Skepticism and Audit Judgment? Jurnal Pengurusan 52: 221 – 233. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17576/pengurusan-2018-52-18
16. Glover, Steven M., and F. Prawitt. 2014. Enhancing Auditor Professional Skepticism: The Professional Skepticism Continuum, Current Issues in Auditing 8(2):1- 10.
17. Grenier, J. H. 2011. Encouraging Professional Skepticism in the Industry Specialization Era: A Dual-Process Model and an Experimental Test, Working paper, Miami University. www.worldcat.org
18. Groot, T., Quadackers, L. & Wright, A. 2009. Auditors' Skeptical Characteristics and Their Relationship to Skeptical Judgments and Decision. Social science research network, Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1478105.
19. Harding, N., Trotman, K. T. 2017. The Effect of Partner Communications of Fraud Likelihood and Skeptical Orientation on Auditors’ Professional Skepticism, Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory 36(2): 111- 131.
20. Holderness, D. K. 2018. The effect of multiple auditors on deception detection in a client inquiry setting. Behavioral Research in Accounting 30 (1): 39-58.
21. Hurtt, R.K. 2007. Professional Skepticism: An Audit Specific Model and Measurement Scale. Auditing. A Journal of Practice and Theory 29 (1): 149-171.
22. Hurtt, R. K. 2010 . Development of a Scale to Measure Professional Skepticism, AUDITING. A Journal of Practice & Theory 29 (1): 149-171.
23. Hurtt, R. K., Brown-Liburd, H. L., Earley, C. E., & Krishnamoorthy, G. 2013. Research on auditor professional skepticism: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future research. Auditing. A Journal of Practice & Theory 32(Supplement): 45-97.
24. Nelson, Mark. W. 2009. A Model and Literature Review of Professional Skepticism in Auditing. A Journal of Practice and Theory 2 (28): 1-34.
25. Nolder, c., and k. kadous. 2018. Grounding the Professional Skepticism Construct in Mindset and Attitude Theory. A Way Forward, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2524573.
26. Olsen, C., & Gold, A. 2018. Future research directions at the intersection between cognitive neuroscience research and auditors’ professional skepticism. Journal of Accounting literature 41 (December): 127-141.
27. Payne, E.A., and R.J. Ramsay. 2005. “Fraud Risk Assessments and Auditors’ Professional Skepticism”. Managerial Auditing Journal 20 (3): 321- 330.
28. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB). 2018. Due professional care in the performance of work. AS 1015. Washington, D.C.: PCAOB
29. Shaub, M. K. and J. E. Lawrence. 1996. Ethics, experience and professional skepticism: A situational analysis. Behavioral Research In Accounting (8 Supplement): 124-157.
30. Strauss, Anselm L., and J. Corbin. 1990. Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria.Qualitative Sociology 13( 1 ):1-21
31. Strauss, Anselm L., and J. Corbin. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
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:

Hasanmaleki A, Abdoli M, Abdollahi A, Abbasi A. Developing a qualitative model of auditors 'professional skepticism: A perspective of auditing partners and managers of Iranian Association of Certified Public Accountants. Valued and Behavioral Accountings Achievements. 2020; 5 (9) :55-79
URL: http://aapc.khu.ac.ir/article-1-679-en.html


Volume 5, Issue 9 (8-2020) Back to browse issues page
فصلنامه دستاوردهای حسابداری ارزشی و رفتاری Valued and Behavioral Accountings Achievements
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.07 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4258