The Effect of Auditor Confirmation Bias on Audit Error with Emphasis on the Moderating Role of Client and Auditor Characteristics

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Salman Lotfi 1
Zohreh Hajiha 2
hamidreza vakilefard 3
1 Ph.D. Student, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Faculty of Humanities, East Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management and Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to explain the effect of confirmation bias on audit error and also to explain the moderating role of client characteristics (market value and institutional shareholder ownership) and auditor (industry specialist auditor and first-class stock exchange trusted auditor) on the relationship between them. For this purpose, a sample consisting of 1168 firm-year from listed firms on the Tehran Stock Exchange during 2012-2020, is collected and analyzed. The results show that confirmation bias has a positive effect on type I audit error and type II audit error. The results also show that the positive effects of confirmation bias on type I audit error and type II audit error are less for clients with high market value, high institutional ownership percentage, and audits performed by industry specialist auditors and first-class stock exchange trusted auditors. The findings of this research could lead to development of theoretical foundations in auditing field, especially audit judgment and audit risk assessment. Further, the study results suggest additional training targeted at mitigating auditors’ use of heuristics may be beneficial.
Keywords
Confirmation Bias
Auditing Risk
Audit Error
  • اخگر، امید، ده ده جانی، راضیه. (1394). رابطه بین تجدید ارائه صورت های مالی و عدم تقارن اطلاعاتی شرکت های پذیرفته شده در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی حسابداری مالی، 7(28)، 104-79/.
  • اکبری نفت چالی، عیسی، پورحیدری، امید، خدامی پور، احمد.(1398). تأثیر تجربه بر رفتارهای غیر ارادی حسابرسان. پژوهش های حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی، 11(41)، 228-197.
  • خانی، عبدالله، ساکنی، محمد. (1399). کاهش سوگیری‌های قضاوتی حسابرسان در هنگام ارزیابی انگیزه‌های رفتاری مثلث تقلب براساس استاندارد حسابرسی 240 ایران. مجله دانش حسابداری، 11(3)، 167-194.
  • کریمی، زهرا، یعقوب نژاد، احمد، صمدی لرگانی، محمود، پورعلی لاکلایه، محمدرضا. (1400). ارزیابی تاثیر سوگیری‌های روانشناختی فردی و ابعاد شخصیتی حسابرسان بر کیفیت حسابرسی. پژوهش های حسابداری مالی و حسابرسی، 13(52)، 52-23.
  • محمد زاده مقدم، محمد باقر، اسماعیل زاده مقری، علی, خسروی پور، نگار. (1401). تاثیر سوگیری شناختی حسابرسان بر هوش معنوی و سبک حسابرس. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 11(41)، 341-355.
  • محمدرضائی، فخرالدین، دیانتی دیلمی، زهرا، داروند، روناک. (1399). نوع گزارش حسابرسی،تعداد و نوع بند های شرط گزارش مشروط حسابرسی: نقش بحران اقتصادی. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 9(33)، 25-39.
  • محمدرضائی، فخرالدین، گلچهره، محمد.(1396). خطای حسابرسی، نوع گزارش و تعداد بندهای شرط حسابرسی: نقش مشغله ی کاری شرکای موسسات حسابرسی. فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی حسابداری مالی، 9(36)، 31-1.
  • محمدرضائی، فخرالدین، محمدرضائی، مهدی. (1393). بررسی رابطه بین رتبه موسسات حسابرسی معتمد سازمان بورس و اوراق بهادار و کیفیت حسابرسی. دانش حسابداری و حسابرسی مدیریت، 4(14)، 1-14.
  • هرمزی، شیرکو، نیکومرام، هاشم، رویایی، رمضانعلی، رهنمای رودپشتی، فریدون.(1395). بررسی تأثیر سوگیری های روانشناختی بر تردید حرفه ای حسابرسی. پژوهش های تجربی حسابداری، 6(4)، 148-123.
  • Aobdia, D., & Petacchi, R. (2017). Consequences of Low-Quality Audits for Engagement Partners. Working Paper, Georgetown University and Northwestern University.
  • Balsam, S., Krishnan, J., & Yang, J. (2003). Auditor Industry Specialization and Earnings Quality. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 22 (2), 71-97.
  • Bedard, J. (1989). An Archival Investigation of Audit Program Planning. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 9 (1), 57-71.
  • Bedard, J., & Johnstone, K. (2004). Earnings Manipulation Risk, Corporate Governance Risk, and Auditors’ Planning and Pricing Decisions. The Accounting Review, 79 (2), 277-304.
  • Bushee, B. (1998). The Influence of Institutional Investors on Myopic R&D Investment Behavior. The Accounting Review, 73 (3), 305-333.
  • Cassell, C., Dearden, S., Rosser, D., & Shipman, J. (2021). The Effect of Confirmation Bias on Auditors’ Risk Assessments: Archival Evidence. AUDITING: A Journal of Practice & Theory, DOI:2308/AJPT-2020-035.
  • Dechow, P., Ge, W., Larson, C., & Sloan, R. (2011). Predicting Material Misstatements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28 (1), 17-82.
  • Francis, J., Maydew, E., & Sparks, H. (1999). The Role of Big 6 Auditors in the Credible Reporting of Accruals. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 18 (2), 17-34.
  • Gartland, D. (2017). The Importance of Audit Planning. Journal of Accountancy, 224 (3), 14.
  • Glover, S., Jiambalvo, J., & Kennedy, J. (2000). Analytical Procedures and Audit-planning Decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 19 (2), 27-45.
  • Gorman, M., Gorman, M., Latta, M., & Cunningham, G. (1984). How Disconfirmatory, Confirmatory and Combined Strategies Affect Group Problem Solving. British Journal of Psychology, 75 (1), 65-79.
  • Hadani, M., Goranova, M., & Khan, R. (2011). Institutional Investors, Shareholder Activism, and Earnings Management. Journal of Business Research, 64 (12), 1352-1360.
  • Joyce, E., & Biddle, G. (1981). Anchoring and Adjustment in Probabilistic Inference in Auditing. Journal of Accounting Research, 19 (1), 120-145.
  • Kane, G., & Velury, U. (2004). The Role of Institutional Ownership in the Market for Auditing Services: An Empirical Investigation. Journal of Business Research, 57 (9), 976-983.
  • Kida, T. (1984). The Impact of Hypothesis-testing Strategies on Auditors’ Use of Judgment Data. Journal of Accounting Research, 22 (1), 332-340.
  • Kinney, W., & Uecker, W. (1982). Mitigating the Consequences of Anchoring in Auditor Judgments. The Accounting Review, 57 (1), 55-69.
  • Kothari, S.P., Leone, A., & Wasley, C. (2005). Performance Matched Discretionary Accruals Measures. Journal of Accounting & Economics, 39 (1), 163-197.
  • Koziel, M. (2017). 4 Strategies for Efficient, Effective Audit Documentation. Journal of Accountancy. Available at: https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2017/nov/ effective-audit-documentation.html.
  • (2011). Elevating Professional Judgment in Auditing and Accounting: The KPMG Professional Judgment Framework.
  • Lennox, C., & Pittman, J. (2010). Big Five Audits and Accounting Fraud. Contemporary Accounting Research, 27 (1), 209-247.
  • McMillan, J., & White, R. (1993). Auditor’s Belief Revision and Evidence Search: The Effect of Hypothesis Frame, Confirmation Bias, and Professional Skepticism. The Accounting Review, 68 (3), 443-465.
  • Miller, G. (2006). The Press as a Watchdog for Accounting Fraud. Journal of Accounting Research, 44 (5), 1001-1033.
  • Moayedi, V., & Aminfard, M. (2012). Iran's post-war financial system. International Journal of Islamic Middle Eastern Financing and Management, 5, 264 – 281.
  • Mock, T., & Wright, A. (1999). Are Audit Programs Risk-Adjusted? Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 18 (1), 55-74.
  • Mohammad Rezaei, F., MohdSaleh, N., Jaffar, R., & Hassan, M. S. (2016). The effects of audit market liberalization and auditor type on audit opinions: The Iranian experience. International Journal of Auditing, 20(1), 87-100.
  • Reichelt, K., & Wang, D. (2010). National and Office-specific Measures of Auditor Industry Expertise and Effects on Audit Quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 48 (3), 647-686.
  • Schulz-Hardt, S., Frey, D., Luthgens, C., & Moscovici, S. (2000). Biased Information Search in Group Decision Making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78 (4), 655-669.
  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of Unshared Information in Group Decision Making: Biased Information Sampling During Discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 48 (6): 1467-1478.
  • Turner, M., & Pratkanis, A. (1994). Social Identity Maintenance Prescriptions for Preventing Groupthink: Reducing Identity Protection and Enhancing Intellectual Conflict. The International Journal of Conflict Management, 5 (3), 254-270.
  • Turner, M., Pratkanis, A., Probasco, P., & Leve, C. (1992). Treat, Cohesion, and Group Effectiveness: Testing a Social Identity Maintenance Perspective on Groupthink. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63 (5), 781-796.
  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185 (4157), 1124-1131.
  • Velury, U., & Jenkins, D. (2006). Institutional Ownership and the Quality of Earnings. Journal of Business Research, 59 (9), 1043-1051.
  • Wason, P. (1960). On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12 (3), 129-140.
  • Weber, J., Willenborg, M., & Zhang, J. (2008). Does Auditor Reputation Matter? The Case of KPMG Germany and ComROAD AG. Journal of Accounting Research, 46 (4), 941-972.
  • Zeghal, D., Chtourou, S., & Sellami, Y.M. (2011). An analysis of the effect of mandatory adoption of IAS/IFRS on earnings management. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 20(2), 61–72.