Issue: № 6, 2024
Doi: https://doi.org/10.37634/efp.2024.6.32
The paper examines the behavioral aspects of auditing in the context of auditor’s independence, auditor’s professional judgment, and professional skepticism. Over the past 50 years, in the researches of foreign scientists, the issues of accounting and auditing have been considered through the theory of behavioral accounting. On the other hand, in the studies of Ukrainian scientists, behavioral accounting in accounting and auditing was almost not considered. The main meaning of the theory of behavioral accounting is not to consider accounting and auditing exclusively in numbers, but to consider that accountants and auditors are people with a specific profession who behave according to their feelings and thoughts. It is customary to consider the concept of behavioral accounting according to the following topics: the influence of accounting information on behavior, management control, audit, ethics. Behavioral aspects of the auditor's independence, which are influenced by an auditor's personal prejudices and the auditor-client relationship, are studied. Auditor’s independence is considered in two dimensions - organizational independence and operational independence. E.g., independent auditors may face the problem of conflicting interests of the public and clients. Behavioral aspects of negotiations between the auditor and the client are also considered. The negotiation tactics used by the participants matter. It can be a yielding tactic, or a tactic of disputes. In particular, in the study of accommodating tactics, it was found that both auditors and clients reciprocated the accommodating negotiation tactics. There are many models of professional skepticism that have been summarized. Nelson and Hurtt's models are considered, the two fundamental components of which are professional skeptical judgment and professional skeptical action. Auditors should exercise professional skepticism, making judgments based on audit evidence without being influenced by clients.
Keywords : behavioral approach, behaviorism, accounting, auditing, professional judgment, professional skepticism
References:
- . Filiz Angay Kutluk. Behavioral Accounting and its Interactions. September 20th, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68972
- . Se Tin S.T., Agustina L., Meyliana M. A new classification of topics in behavioral accounting: current research direction from BRIA journal in the past 10 years. Journal of the Academy of Business and Retail Management. 2017. Vol. 11 (3). pp. 47–58. URL: www.jbrmr.com
- . Nowak M. Behavioral Accounting Research ‒ Accounting Research in the Behavioral Paradigm? True or False? Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Bankowej w Poznaniu. 2016. Vol. 66 (1). pp. 119–127.
4. Hofstedt T.R., Kinard J.C. A strategy for behavioral accounting research. The Accounting Review. 1970. Vol. 45(1). pp. 38-54.
5. Tumanian A. Behavioral aspects of accounting and auditing. Economics. Finances. Law. 2023. № 12. pp. 108-111. (in Ukrainian).
6. Bozkurt N. Muhasebe Denetimi. Istanbul, 2012. 379 p.
7. Duska R. et al. Accounting Ethics. West Sussex, UK, 2011. 237 p.
8. Parker L.D., Ferris K.R., Otley D.T. Accounting for the Human Factor. Australia, 1989. 212 p.
9. Chiang C. Conceptualising the linkage between professional scepticism and auditor independence. Pacific Accounting Review. 2016. Issue 28 (2). pp. 180–200. URL: http://doi.org/10.1108/PAR-08-2015-0034
10. Nelson M.W. A model and literature review of professional skepticism in auditing. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. 2009. Issue 28 (2). URL: http://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2009.28.2.1
11. Hurtt R.K. Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory. 2010. Issue 29 (1). pp. 149–171. URL: http://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.149
12. Knapp M.C. Audit Conflict: An Empirical Study of the Perceived Ability of Auditors to Resist. The Accounting Review. 1985. Issue 60 (2). pp. 202–211.
13. American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit. 2002. URL: https://us.aicpa.org/content/dam/aicpa/research/standards/auditattest/downloadabledocuments/au-00316.pdf
14. Peursem K. Van. The Auditor’s Dilemma: An Economic Perspective On An Old Problem. Working Paper Series. 2005. Issue 86. 21 p.
15. Espinosa-Pike M., Barrainkua I. An exploratory study of the pressures and ethical dilemmas in the audit conflict, Revista de Contabilidad. 2016. Issue 19 (1). pp. 10–20. URL: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcsar.2014.10.001
16. Bergner J.M. et al. Concession, contention and accountability in auditor client negotiations. Behavioral Research in Accounting. 2016. Issue 28(1). pp. 15-25. URL: http://doi.org/10.2308/bria‐51146
17. Robertson J.C. The effects of ingratiation and client incentive on auditor judgment. Behavioral Research in Accounting. 2010. Issue 22(2). pp. 69-86. URL: http://doi.org/0.2308/bria.2010.22.2.69
18. Buchman T.A. et al. Accountability and auditors’ judgments about contingent events. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting. 1996. Issue 23(3). pp. 379-398.
19. Bamber EM. Opportunities in accounting behavioral research. Behavioral Research in Accounting. 1993. Issue 5. 29 p.
20. Pickerd J.S. et al. An examination of how entry‐level staff auditors respond to tone at the top vis‐a‘‐vis tone at the bottom. Behavioral Research in Accounting. 2015. Issue 27(1). pp. 79-98. URL: http://doi.org/0.2308/bria‐50918
21. Endrawes M. Professional Scepticism of Auditors: a Cross-Cultural Experiment. University of Western Sydney, 2010. URL: https://researchdirect.westernsydney.edu.au/islandora/object/uws%3A8931/datastream/PDF/view
22. Quadackers L., Groot T., Wright A. Auditors’ professional skepticism: Neutrality versus presumptive doubt. Contemporary accounting research. 2014. Issue 31 (3). pp. 639–657. URL: http://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12052
23. Schmitt D.B., Hageman A.M., Radtke R.R. A Research Note on the Relationship Between Professional Skepticism and Client Advocacy. Advances in Accounting Behavioral Research. 2014. pp. 161-182. URL: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1475-148820140000017005
24. Harding N., Azim M.I., Jidin R., Muir J.P. A Consideration of Literature on Trust and Distrust as they Relate to Auditor Professional Scepticism. Australian Accounting Review. 2016. Issue 26 (3). pp. 243–254. URL: http://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12126.
25. Vassiljev M., Alver L. Behavioral aspects of auditing and the auditor’s decision-making as a key cognitive process in the case of fraud. URL: https://ztr.skwp.pl/api/files/view/997883.pdf