Model: Open Access/Peer Reviewed
Start Year: 2017
Received Date: 07 September 2023 | Accepted Date: 24 October 2023 | Published Date: 30 October 2023
Keywords: competition, Audit, economics, independence, professional ethics, public interest.
This paper is an in-depth analysis of the pressures that come upon the auditors in public practice and corporate organisations. Struggle is the meaning of life. When you try to solve one problem you tend to complicate others. Several literature and previous were reviewed, the majority of them with discovery and strong perception that ethical dilemmas involved choosing powerful seemingly ‘justifiable’ non-ethical considerations over strict ethical choices. Such is sometimes the economic dilemma created when auditors are being accountable for their actions. The auditors are sometimes confronted with conflict of interest as considered in most literature reviewed. The TP (Temporary Predictive Behaviour) Cognitive Model with Moral Seduction Theory also forms part of the analysis in this paper. This economic dilemma faced is prop out of fright of the “self-fulfilling prophecy effect” which was further described as the auditor’s fear to precipitate client failure after the release of a warning signal because of its impact on current and potential investors, creditors, suppliers, and customers. The paper concluded that the eventual evaluation of the auditors is vital to the investment decision of the clients’ financial statement users and poses a danger to the continued existence of the client. The study further recommended action that may provide greater economic incentives for the auditor to conduct an ethical audit.
|Ahmed, A. (2010). Ethics in auditing; and ethical studies in different accounting bodies. Available at SSRN 1631346.
|Armstrong, M. B., Ketz, J. E., & Owsen, D. (2003). Ethics education in accounting: Moving toward ethical motivation and ethical behavior. Journal of Accounting Education, 21(1), 1-16.
|Bebeau, M. J., Rest, J. R., & Yamoor, C. M. (1985). Measuring dental students' ethical sensitivity. Journal of Dental Education, 49(4), 225-235.
|Chi, M. T. H (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts' characteristics. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P. J. & Hoffman, R.R. (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. Cambridge Press.
|DeFond, M. L., Raghunandan, K., & Subramanyam, K. R. (2002). Do non-audit service fees impair auditor independence? Evidence from going concern audit opinions. Journal of Accounting Research, 40(4), 1247-1274.
|Duska, R. (2005). The good auditor-Skeptic or Wealth accumulator? Ethical lessons learned from the Arthur Andersen debacle. Journal of Business Ethics, 57, 17-29.
|Earley, C. E. & Kelly, P. (2004). A note on ethics educational interventions in an undergraduate auditing course: is there an 'Enron effect'? Issues in Accounting Education,19 (1), 53-62.
|Fahimeh, S., & Mahdi, M. (2013). Factors influencing auditor's ethical sensitivity in ethical decision making: evidence from Iran. Universal Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 3(11), 1-16.|
|Gaa, J. C. (1992). Discussion of a model of auditors' ethical decision processes. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 11(Supplement 60), 66.|
|Guiral, A., Gonzalo, J. A., & Rodgers, W. (2007). Information content and recency effect of the audit report in loan rating decisions. Accounting and Finance, 47, 285-304.
|Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E., & Gonzalo, J. A. (2007). A Cognitive Model Testing Moral Seduction Theory: Unconscious bias and the role played by expertise. Financial Support of the Ministry of Education and Culture, Spain. Research Project.|
|Guiral, A., Rodgers, W., Ruiz, E., Gonzalo, J.A. (2007) Ethical dilemmas in auditing: Dishonesty or unintentional bias. A paper presented at the International Symposium on Audit Research, 31st European Accounting Congress in Amsterdam|
|Herron, T. L., & Gilbertson D. L. (2004). Ethical principles vs. Ethical rules: The moderating effect of moral development on audit independence judgments. Business Ethics Quarterly 14(3), 499-523.
|Hooks, K. L., &Tyson, T. (1995), Gender diversity driven changes in the public accounting workplace: a moral intensity analysis", Research on Accounting Ethics, 1, 267-89.|
|International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) (2005). IFAC Annual Report. Retrieved from https://www.ifac.org/ publications/2005-ifac-annual-report.|
|Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organisations: an issue contingent model", Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-95.
|Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697-720.
|Karajeh, A.A.-A.H., (2004). How far external auditors are committed to the code of conduct in Jordan, and the ways which encourage them to follow professional behaviour. In: Accounting Amman Arab University Amman.|
|Kristin, S. (2006). Corporate accounting scandal. Crime legislation; State Boards and Commissions; Accountants; Whistleblowing; Corporations; Auditors. OLR Research Report, 2006-R-0122. Retrieved from https://www.cga.ct.gov/2006/rpt/2006-r-0122.htm|
|Louwers, T. J., Messina, F. M., & Richard, M. D. (1999). The auditor's going-concern disclosure as a self-fulfilling prophecy: A discrete-time survival analysis. Decision Science, 30, 805-824.
|Moore, D. A., Tetlock, P. E., Tanlu, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (2006). Conflicts of interest and the case of auditor independence: moral seduction and strategic issue cycling. Academy of Management Review, 31, 10-29.
|Nelson, M. W. (2006). Ameliorating conflicts of interest in auditing: Effects of recent reforms on auditors and their clients. Academy of Management Review, 31, 30-42.
|Rodgers, W. (1997). Throughput modeling: Financial information used by decision makers. JAI Press: Greenwich, CT.|
|Rodgers, W. (1999). The influences of conflicting information on novices' and loan officers' actions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 20, 123-145.
|Rodgers, W., & Gago, S. (2001). A model capturing ethics and executive compensation. Journal of Business Ethics, 48, 189-202.
|Sloman, S. A. (2002). Two systems of reasoning. In: Gilovich, D., Griffin, D. & Kahneman, D. (eds.). Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press: New York.|
|Tirri, K., & Nokelainen, P. (2008). Identification of multiple intelligences with the Multiple Intelligence Profiling Questionnaire III. Psychology Science, 50(2), 206-221.|
|Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458.
|Weaver, K.., Morse, J. & Mitcham, C. (2008). Ethical sensitivity in professional practice: concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(5), 607-618.