تاثیرهویت حرفه‌ای و ذهنیت نتیجه گرا بر قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرسان

ملانظری, مهناز; شمس, زهرا

doi:10.22051/ijar.2016.2586

تاثیرهویت حرفه‌ای و ذهنیت نتیجه گرا بر قضاوت حرفه‌ای حسابرسان

نوع مقاله : مقاله ترویجی

نویسندگان

¹ دانشیار، گروه حسابداری، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی و اقتصادی، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ایران

² دانشجوی حسابداری دانشگاه الزهرا

10.22051/ijar.2016.2586

چکیده

قضاوت افراد، بسته به ماهیت و گستره رویه‌هایی که برای قضاوت استفاده می‌کنند، با یکدیگر متفاوت است. کارشناسان هر حرفه نیز از این قاعده مستثنی نبوده و ممکن است قضاوت‌های متفاوتی انجام دهند. تفاوت در قضاوت تنها به قضاوت افراد مختلف مربوط نمی‌شود، بلکه هر فرد می‌تواند در زمان و شرایط مختلف در مورد یک موضوع، اظهارنظرهای متفاوتی را ابراز نماید. ذینفعان، نیازمند درک علل قضاوت‌های حرفه‌ای متفاوت کارشناسان می‌باشند تا بتوانند به‌درستی از نتایج کار آن‌ها استفاده نمایند. در این میان عوامل زیادی می‌تواند بر قضاوت افراد مؤثر واقع گردد که تحقیقات بسیاری به آن‌ها پرداخته‌اند. تحقیق حاضر از تئوری هویت اجتماعی1به‌منظور تعیین اثر هویت یک شریک حسابرس، یک ناظر داخلی یا یک بازرس، بر قضاوت کارشناسانه استفاده می‌کند. همچنین بخشی از این تحقیق به اثر ذهنیت نتیجه گرا اختصاص یافته است. اکثر تحقیقات در این زمینه که در حوزه حسابرسی انجام شده است، بیان می‌دارند که حسابرسان از لحاظ ذهنیت در خصوص نتیجه با یکدیگر تفاوت دارند. همچنین آن‌ها قضاوت‌های متفاوتی در صورت وجود یا عدم وجود این دانش ابراز داشته‌اند. این تحقیق همچنین به اثر همزمان ذهنیت نتیجه گرا و هویت اجتماعی نیز اشاره خواهد داشت. بر‌اساس پیشینه موجود، این تحقیق به انواع تحقیقاتی که اثرات پیش‌گفته را مورد سنجش قرار داده‌اند مروری خواهد داشت.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

سایر

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Influence of Professional Identity and Outcome Knowledge on Professional Judgment

نویسندگان [English]

Mahnaz Molanazari ¹
Zahra Shams ²

¹ Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, Faculty of Social Sciences and Economic, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

² Alzahra University Accounting Student

چکیده [English]

Judgment of people, depending on the nature and scope of procedures to use judgment, differ from each other. Professional experts have not also been excluded from this rule and may make different judgments. The difference in judgment is not related only to judge individuals, but each person may express different opinions on a subject at the time and different circumstances. Stakeholders need to understand the different reasons of professional judgments’ experts in order to properly use the results of their work. In the moment, many factors can contribute to judging people who have a lot of research on them. This research uses the social identity theory to determine the effect of the identity of an auditor partner, a domestic observer or an inspector, on expert judgment. Also part of the research is about outcome knowledge. Most of the research that has been done in the field of audit, state that the auditors have different outcome knowledge. They also have different judgments expressed in the presence or absence of this knowledge. The study also refers to the simultaneous effect of outcome knowledge and social identity. According to the literature, this study reviews the previous research in this area

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

Professional identity
Outcome knowledge
Professional judgment

مراجع

AICPA. (2012). ET Section 102 - Integrity and Objectivity. Code of Professional Conduct.

Anderson, J. C. , Lowe, D. J. , & Reckers, P. M. (1993). Evaluation of Auditor Decisions: Hindsight Bias Effects and the Expectation Gap. Journal of Economic Psychology,14, 711–737.

Anna J. Johnson (2014). The Influence of Professional Identity and Outcome Knowledge on Professional Judgment (Doctoral dissertation) , Florida Atlantic University.

Ashforth, B. E. , & Mael, F. (1989). Social Identity Theory and the Organization. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1) , 20–39.

Ashforth, B. E. , Rogers, K. M. , & Corley, K. G. (2011). Identity in Organizations: Exploring Cross-Level Dynamics. Organizational Science, 22 (5) , 1144–1156.

Bamber, E. , & Iyer, V. (2002). Big 5 Auditors’ Professional and Organizational Identification: Consistency and Conflict? Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 21 (2) , 21–38.

Benke, R. L. , & Rhode, J. G. (1984). Intent to Turnover Among Higher Level Employees in Large CPA Firms. Advances in Accounting, 1, 157–174.

Bonner, S. (1990). Experience effects in auditing: The role of task-specific knowledge. The Accounting Review, 65 (January) , 72–92.

Bonner, S. (2008). Judgment and decision making in accounting.

Cooper, J. C. , & Kovacic, W. E. (2012). Behavioral Economics: Implications for Regulatory Behavior. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 41, 41–58.

Dirsmith, M. W. , Heian, J. B. , & Covaleski, M. A. (1997). Structure and Agency in an Institutionalized Setting: The Application and Social Transformation of Control in the Big Six. Accounting Organizations & Society, 22 (1) , 1–27.

Emby, C. , Gelardi, A. M. , & Lowe, D. J. (2002). A Research Note on the Influence of Outcome Knowledge on Audit Partners’ Judgments. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 14, 87–103.

Guinn, R. E. , Bhamornsiri, S. , & Blanthorne, C. (2004). Promotion to Partner in Big Firms: Truths and Trends. The CPA Journal, 74 (4) , 54–55.

Hogg, M. , Terry, D. , & White, K. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of Identity Theory with Social Identity Theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58 (4) , 255–269.

Hwang, W. , & Ting, J. Y. (2008). Disaggregating the Effects of Acculturation and Acculturative Stree on the Mental Health of Asian Americans. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Pschology, 14, 147–154.

Iyer, V. M. , Bamber, E. M. , & Barefield, R. M. (1997). Identification of Accounting Firm Alumni with their Former Firm: Antecedents and Outcomes. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 22 (3/4) , 315–336.

Jenkins, J. G. , Deis, D. R. , Bedard, J. C. , & Curtis, M. B. (2008). Accounting Firm Culture and Governance: A Research Synthesis. Behavioral Research in Accounting, 20 (1) , 45–74.

Jennings, M. , Lowe, D. , & Reckers, P. (1998). Causality as an Influence on Hindsight Bias: An Empirical Examination of Judges’ Evaluation of Professional Audit Judgment. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 21, 143–167.

Libby, R. (1981). Accounting and human information processing: theory and applications.

Libby, R. (1995). The Role o f Knowledge and Memory in Audit Judgment. In R. H. Ashton & A. H. Ashton (Eds. ) , Judgment and Decision-Making Research in Accounting and Auditing (pp. 176–206).

Libby, R. , & Luft, J. (1993). Determinants of judgment performance in accounting settings: Ability, knowledge, motivation, and environment. Accounting Organizations & Society, 18, 425–450.

Neter, J. , Wasserman, W. , & Whitmore, G. A. (1993). Applied Statistics (4th ed. ). New York City: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Norris, F. (2011, October 21). Audit flaws revealed, at long last. The New York Times. New York.

Peecher, M. , & Piercey, M. (2008). Judging audit quality in light of adverse outcomes: Evidence of outcome bias and reverse outcome bias. Contemporary Accounting Research, 25 (1) , 243–274.

Shanteau, J. (2000). Why do experts disagree? In B. Green, F. Delmar, T. Eisenberg, B. Howcroft, M. Lewis, D. Shoemaker, … R. Vivian (Eds. ) , Risk Behavior and Risk Management in Business Life. (pp. 186–196).

Tan, H. , & Libby, R. (1997). Tacit managerial knowledge versus technical knowledge as determinants of audit expertise in the field. Journal of Accounting Research, (Spring) , 97–113.

Whittington, R. , & Pany, K. (2012). Principles of Auditing & Other Assurance Services (18th ed. ).

Wu, E. K. Y. , & Mak, W. W. S. (2012). Acculturation Process and Distress: Mediating Roles of Sociocultureal Adaptation and Acculturative Stress. The Counseling Psychologist, 40 (1) , 66–92