The comparative effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing professional scepticism

Sarah Kim, Ken T. Trotman and Neil Fargher

Accounting and Finance, 2015, vol. 55, issue 4, 1015-1040

Abstract: type="main" xml:id="acfi12084-abs-0001">

Responding to concerns about insufficient professional scepticism in audits (e.g. PCAOB, , ; ASIC, ), we investigate the effect of process and outcome accountability in enhancing the level of professional scepticism and the differences in effects across audit experience levels. In our experiment, we manipulate the type of accountability (outcome versus process) for both novice auditors and audit seniors. We examine the effect on four measures of professional scepticism and find that auditors show greater levels of professional scepticism when they are expected to justify their judgment process, rather than their final judgments. Our results also show that the professional scepticism of novice auditors improves to a greater extent than that of more experienced auditors (audit seniors) under process accountability.

Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (5)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/acfi.2015.55.issue-4 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:acctfi:v:55:y:2015:i:4:p:1015-1040

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0810-5391

Access Statistics for this article

Accounting and Finance is currently edited by Robert Faff

More articles in Accounting and Finance from Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().