Notions of the professional skepticism of the Public Accountant in exercise of the audits: a theoretical perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22267/rtend.202102.150Keywords:
accounting audit, professional scepticism, professional independence, IFAC code of ethics, personal biasAbstract
Skepticism is a philosophical doctrine that in professional practice contributes to Public Accounting professionals to acquire an approach based on doubt about the veracity and consistency of the information they should review during the performance of an audit. Doubts that lead him to corroborate each support found in the process and that allow him to have sufficient bases to issue reliable financial opinions. This work presents a literary review that explores the elements that influence professional skepticism in public accountants who act as auditors. This research was carried out using a descriptive and exploratory qualitative approach based on existing literature. In this study, it was found that independence, personal bias and conflicts of interest are key factors that improve or impair professional skepticism in the execution of the audit engagement.
Downloads
References
(1) Andreas, H., Zarefar, A. y Rasuli, H. M. (2016). Analysis of factors affecting the auditors’professional scepticism and audit result quality-the case of indonesian government auditors. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research. 14(6), 3807-3817.
(2) Bachmann, R., Knights D. y Sydow, J. (2001). Trust and Control in Organizational Relations. Organization Studies, 22(2), V-VIII.
(3) Bazerman, M. H. y Loewenstein, G. (2001). Taking the bias out of bean counting. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 28.
(4) Bell, T. B., Peecher, M. E. y Solomon, I. (2005). The 21st Century Public Company Audit: Conceptual Elements of KPMG’s Global Audit Methodology. Sweden: KPMG International.
(5) Boyd, C. (2004). The structural origins of conflicts of interest in the accounting profession. Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(3), 377-398. doi: 10.5840/beq200414325
(6) Byrnes, P. E., Al-Awadhi, A., Gullvist, B., Brown-Liburd, H., Teeter, R., Warren, J. D. y Vasarhelyi, M. (2018). Evolution of Auditing: From the Traditional Approach to the Future Audit. En Chan, D. Y., Chiu, V. y Vasarhelyi, M. A. (Ed.), Continuous Auditing (Rutgers Studies in Accounting Analytics). (pp. 285-297). Emerald Publishing Limited. doi: 10.1108/978-1-78743-413-420181014
(7) DeAngelo, L. E. (1981). Auditor Size and Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting and Economics December, 3(3), 183-199. doi: 10.1016/0165-4101(81)90002-1
(8) Gay, G. (2002). Bridging the business dynamic into the audit. Australian CPA, 72(1), 66-68.
(9) Guénin-Paracini, H., Malsch, B. y Tremblay, M. (2015). On the operational reality of auditors’ independence: Lessons from the field. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 34(2), 201-236.
(10) Hernández, S., Fernández, C. y Baptista, P. (2003). Metodología de la Investigación. México D.F.: McGraw-Hill.
(11) Hurtt, K., Eining, M. y Plumlee, R. D. (2008). An Experimental Examination of Professional Skepticism. Doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1140267
(12) International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board-IAASB. (2014). ISA 200: Overall Objectives of the Independent Auditor and the Conduct of an Audit in Accordance with International Standards of Auditing. New York: International Federation of Accountants (IFAC).
(13) International Federation of Accountants-IFAC. (2018). Código internacional de ética para profesionales de la contabilidad (incluidas normas internacionales de independencia). Recuperado de https://www.ifac.org/system/files/publications/files/Final-Pronouncement-The-Restructured-Code-ES.pdf
(14) Jenkins, J. G. y Haynes, C. M. (2003). The persuasiveness of client preferences: an investigation of the impact of preference, timing and client credibility. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 22(1), 143-154.
(15) Knechel, W. R., Niemi, L. y Zerni, M. (2013). Empirical evidence on the implicit determinants of compensation in Big 4 audit partnerships. Journal of Accounting Research, 51(2), 349-387. doi: 10.1111/1475-679X.12009
(16) Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J. y Bies, R. J. (1998). Trust and Distrust: New Relationships and Realities. The Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 438-458. doi: 10.2307/259288
(17) Matthews, D. (2006). A History of Auditing: The Changing Audit Process in Britain from the Nineteenth Century to the Present Day. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
(18) Mayer, J. y Mussweiler, T. (2011). Suspicious Spirits, Flexible Minds:When Distrust Enhances Creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(6), 1262-1277.
(19) McKnight, D. H. y Chervany, N. L. (2001). Trust and Distrust Definitions: One Bite at a Time. En Falcone, R., Singh, M. y Tan, Y. H. (Eds), Trust in Cyber-Societies (pp. 27–54). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. doi: 10.1007/3-540-45547-7_3
(20) Moore, D. A., Tetlock, P. E., Tanlu, L. y Bazerman, M. H. (2006). Conflicts of interest and the case of auditor independence: Moral seduction and strategic issue cycling. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 10-29. doi: 10.5465/amr.2006.19379621
(21) Power, M. (1999). The Audit Society: Rituals of verification. New York: Oxford University Press.
(22) Quadackers, L., Groot, T. y Wright, A. (2014). Auditors’ Professional Skepticism: Neutrality versus Presumptive Doubt. Contemporary Accounting Research, 31(3), 639-657. doi: 10.1111/1911-3846.12052
(23) Rennie, M. D., Kopp, L. S. y Lemon, W. M. (2010). Exploring Trust and the Auditor–Client Relationship: Factors Influencing the Auditor’s Trust of a Client Representative. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 29(1), 279-293. doi: 10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.279
(24) Reynolds, J. K. y Francis, J. (2001). Does size matter? The influence of large clients on office-level auditor reporting decisions. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 30(3), 375-400.
(25) Richard, C. (2006). Why an auditor can’t be competent and independent: a French case study. European Accounting Review, 15(2), 153-179. doi: 10.1080/09638180500104832
(26) Rodgers, W., Guiral, A. y Gonzalo, J. A. (2009). Different pathways that suggest whether auditors going concern opinions are ethically based. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(3), 347-361. doi: 10.1007/s10551-008-9851-8
(27) Schul, Y., Mayo, R. y Burnstein, E. (2008). The Value of Distrust. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(5), 1293-1302. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2008.05.003
(28) Skinner, D. J. y Srinivasan, S. (2012). Audit Quality and Auditor Reputation: Evidence from Japan. The Accounting Review, 87(5), 1737-1765. doi: 10.2308/accr-50198
(29) Sukriah, I. y Inapty, B. A. (2009). Pengaruh Pengalaman Kerja, Independensi, Obyektifitas, Integritas dan Kompetensi Terhadap Kualitas Hasil Pemeriksaan. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi, 12, 3-9.
(30) Walters, J. E. y Dangol, R. (2006). Ethical implications of independent quality auditing. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 5(1), 107-110.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Those authors who have publications with this journal, accept the following terms:
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial 4.0 Internacional License. The articles can be copied, distributed, adapted and communicated publicly, as long as the credits of the work are recognized and the respective source is quoted. This work can not be used for commercial purposes.
To increase their visibility, documents are sent to databases and indexing systems.
The content of the items is the responsibility of each author, and does not compromise in any way, journal or institution.
