Antecedents and Outcomes of Auditor Identities: Evidence from the Behavioral Literature and Directions for Future Research

IF 0.7 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE Behavioral Research in Accounting Pub Date : 2023-07-21 DOI:10.2308/bria-2022-019
Stephen H. Fuller, Tracey J. Riley, Andrew C. Stuart
{"title":"Antecedents and Outcomes of Auditor Identities: Evidence from the Behavioral Literature and Directions for Future Research","authors":"Stephen H. Fuller, Tracey J. Riley, Andrew C. Stuart","doi":"10.2308/bria-2022-019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper reviews and synthesizes the behavioral literature on the various antecedents of auditor identities and explains, through social identity theory, how they influence audit outcomes. We discuss the four identities most relevant to auditors (client, firm, team, and profession), first reviewing the psychology literature to describe each of these identities and then reviewing the auditing literature to understand how these identities emerge and impact audit quality. Overall, we find that whereas all four auditor identities have been examined in the literature, much of the research focuses on client identification due to the risk to auditor independence and objectivity. Further, identities can impact audit quality positively or negatively depending on contextual factors. Also, we find few studies investigate whether multiple auditor identities interact to affect audit quality, which provides opportunities for future research with the hope that it can help the profession identify ways of improving audit outcomes.","PeriodicalId":46356,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Research in Accounting","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Research in Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2308/bria-2022-019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reviews and synthesizes the behavioral literature on the various antecedents of auditor identities and explains, through social identity theory, how they influence audit outcomes. We discuss the four identities most relevant to auditors (client, firm, team, and profession), first reviewing the psychology literature to describe each of these identities and then reviewing the auditing literature to understand how these identities emerge and impact audit quality. Overall, we find that whereas all four auditor identities have been examined in the literature, much of the research focuses on client identification due to the risk to auditor independence and objectivity. Further, identities can impact audit quality positively or negatively depending on contextual factors. Also, we find few studies investigate whether multiple auditor identities interact to affect audit quality, which provides opportunities for future research with the hope that it can help the profession identify ways of improving audit outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审计师身份的前提和结果:来自行为文献的证据和未来研究的方向
本文回顾和综合了关于审计师身份的各种前因的行为文献,并通过社会认同理论解释了它们如何影响审计结果。我们将讨论与审计师最相关的四种身份(客户、公司、团队和职业),首先回顾心理学文献来描述这些身份,然后回顾审计文献来了解这些身份是如何产生的并影响审计质量。总体而言,我们发现尽管所有四种审计师身份都在文献中进行了研究,但由于审计师独立性和客观性的风险,大部分研究都集中在客户身份上。此外,根据上下文因素,身份可能对审计质量产生积极或消极的影响。此外,我们发现很少有研究调查多个审计师身份是否相互作用影响审计质量,这为未来的研究提供了机会,希望它能帮助该行业找到改善审计结果的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
11
期刊最新文献
Relative Performance Information and Rule-Breaking: The Moderating Effect of Group Identity In All Fairness: A Meta-Analysis of the Tax Fairness–Tax Compliance Literature I’m Working Hard, but It’s Hardly Working: The Consequences of Motivating Employee Effort That Fails to Achieve Performance Targets Auditor Materiality Disclosures and Investor Trust: How to Address Conditional Risks of Disclosure Mandates The Conservatism Principle and Asymmetric Preferences over Reporting Errors
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1