An Examination of Auditor Confirmation Bias and Audit Quality With an Emphasis on the Moderating Role of Client and Auditor Characteristics

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD Student, Department of Accounting, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Department of Accounting, East Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Department of Accounting, 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 quality and the moderating roles of client characteristics (market value and institutional shareholder’s ownership) and auditor (industry specialist auditor and first-class stock exchange trusted auditor) on audit quality and the relationship between them. For this purpose, a sample of 146 firms listed on the Tehran Stock Exchange, including 1314 firm-year during 2012-2020, was collected and analyzed. In this study, financial restatement and the absolute value of discretionary accruals were used as audit quality proxy. The results showed that confirmation bias has a negative effect on audit quality. The results also demonstrated that the adverse effects of confirmation bias on audit quality 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 the development of theoretical foundations in the audit context, especially audit judgment and audit risk assessment. Further, the study results suggest that additional training in order to mitigate the auditors’ use of heuristics may be beneficial.

Keywords

Main Subjects


Article Title [Persian]

سوگیری تأییدی حسابرس و کیفیت حسابرسی: با تأکید بر نقش تعدیلی ویژگی های صاحبکار و حسابرس

Authors [Persian]

  • سلمان لطفی 1
  • زهره حاجیها 2
  • حمیدرضا وکیلی فرد 3
1 دانشجوی دکتری حسابداری، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
2 استاد گروه حسابداری، واحد تهران شرق، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
3 دانشیار گروه حسابداری، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران
Abstract [Persian]

هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر تبیین تأثیر سوگیری تأییدی بر کیفیت حسابرسی و همچنین تبیین نقش تعدیلی ویژگی های صاحبکار (ارزش بازار و مالکیت سهامداران نهادی) و حسابرس (حسابرس متخصص صنعت و حسابرس معتمد بورس طبقه اول) بر ارتباط بین آنها می باشد. برای این منظور نمونه ای متشکل از 146 شرکت پذیرفته در بورس اوراق بهادار تهران شامل 1314 سال-شرکت در طی دوره زمانی 1391 تا 1399 جمع آوری و مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. در این پژوهش تجدید ارائه صورت های مالی و قدرمطلق اقلام تعهدی اختیاری به عنوان معیارهای کیفیت حسابرسی بکار برده شده اند. نتایج نشان می دهد که سوگیری تأییدی حسابرس بر کیفیت حسابرسی تأثیر منفی و معناداری دارد. نتایج همچنین نشان می دهد که صاحبکاران با ارزش شرکت بالا، مالکیت سهامداران نهادی بالا، حسابرس متخصص صنعت و حسابرس معتمد طبقه اول، تأثیر منفی سوگیری تأییدی حسابرس بر کیفیت حسابرسی را تضعیف می کنند. یافته های این پژوهش می تواند موجب بسط مبانی نظری در حوزه حسابرسی به ویژه قضاوت حسابرسی و ارزیابی ریسک حسابرسی گردد. همچنین نتایج این پژوهش می تواند از طریق آموزش های اضافی آگاهی مناسبی درباره کاهش استفاده حسابرسان از روش های اکتشافی و شهودی، ارائه کند.

Keywords [Persian]

  • سوگیری تأییدی
  • ریسک حسابرسی
  • تجدید ارائه صورت های مالی
  • اقلام تعهدی اختیاری
  • کیفیت حسابرسی
Akbari NaftChali, I., Pourheidari, O., & Khodamipour, A. (2017). The effect of experience on auditors’ involuntary behaviors. The Financial Accounting and Auditing Researches, 11(41), 197-228. (In Persian)
Akhgar, M. O., & Dadejani, R. (2016). The relationship between financial restatement and information asymmetry: Evidence from Iran. Quarterly Financial Accounting Journal, 7(28), 79-104. (In Persian)
Aobdia, D., & Petacchi, R. (2017) Consequences of low-quality audits for engagement partners [working paper]. Georgetown University and Northwestern University. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2983900.
Arab Abadi, R., Baharmoghddam, M., & Khodamipour, A. (2021). Cognitive style and auditor’s judgment: Does cognitive style mitigate the impact of recency bias on the auditors’ belief revision process? Journal of Audit Science, 21(1), 5-27. (In Persian)
Ashton, A. H., & Ashton, R. H. (1988). Sequential Belief Revision in Auditing. The Accounting Review63(4), 623–641. http://www.jstor.org/stable/247903
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.
Burke, A. (2007). R & D Considerations for the Performance and Application of Electrochemical Capacitors. Electrochimica Acta, 53, 1083-1091.
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,88-102. https://doi.org/10.2308/AJPT-2020-035 
Chang, C. J., & Luo, Y. (2021). Data visualization and cognitive biases in audits. Managerial Auditing Journal, 36(1), 1-16.
Church, B. (1991). An examination of the effect that commitment to a hypothesis has on auditors’ evaluations of confirming and disconfirming evidence. Contemporary Accounting Research, 7(2), 513-534.
Cox, L. A. (T.), Jr., & Popken, D. A. (2008). Overcoming confirmation bias in causal attribution: A case study of antibiotic resistance risks. Risk Analysis, 28(5), 1155–1171
Cloyd, C., & Spilker, B. (1999). The influence of client preferences on tax professionals’ search for judicial precedents, subsequent judgments and recommendations. The Accounting Review, 74(3), 299-322.
Dalwai, T., Mohammadi, S. S., Chugh, G., & Salehi, M. (2021). Does intellectual capital and corporate governance have an impact on annual report readability? Evidence from an emerging market. International Journal of Emerging Markets. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-08-2020-0965
Dechow, P., Ge, W., Larson, C., & Sloan, R. (2011). Predicting material misstatements. Contemporary Accounting Research, 28(1), 17-82.
Fay, R., & Montague, N. (2015). I’m Not Biased, Am I? Avoid five common judgment biases that can affect accounting and auditing decisions. Journal of Accountancy, 219(2), 26-31.
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), 129-146.
Glover, S., Jiambalvo, J., & Kennedy, J. (2000). Analytical procedures and audit-planning decisions. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 19(2), 27-45.
Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2014). Enhancing auditor professional skepticism: The professional skepticism continuum. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(2), 1-10.
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.
Hormozi, S., Nikoomaram, H., Royaee, R., & Rahnama Roodposhti, F. (2017). The effects of psychological biases on auditors’ professional skepticism. Empirical Research in Accounting, 6(4), 123-148. (In Persian)
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.
Karimi, Z., Yaghoobnezhad, A., SamadiLorghani, M., & Pourali, M. R. (2022). Evaluating the effect of auditors’ individual psychological bias and personality dimensions on audit quality. Financial Accounting and Auditing Research, 13(3), 23-52 (In Persian).
Khani, A., & Sakeni, M. (2020). Effects of fraud-triangle decomposition on sensitivity and quality of auditor’s fraud risk assessment based on Iranian Auditing Standard Number # 240. Journal of Accounting Knowledge, 11(3), 167-194. (In Persian)
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,15 (2),99-115. https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2017/nov/ effective-audit-documentation.html.
KPMG. (2011). Elevating professional judgment in auditing and accounting: The KPMG professional judgment framework. www.kpmg.com
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, 1, 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., Dianati Deilami, Z., & darvand, R. (2020). Audit opinions, the number and types of clauses of the conditional auditor’s remarks: The role of economic crisis. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 9(3), 25-39. (In Persian)
Mohammad Rezaei, F., & Golchehreh, M. (2018). audit failure, audit opinion and auditor’s remarks: The role of audit partner busyness. Quarterly Financial Accounting Journal, 9(3), 1-31. (In Persian)
Mohammad Rezaei, F., & Mohammad Rezaei, M. (2015). Audit firms ranking and audit quality. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 4(14), 1-14. (In Persian)
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.
Mohammadzadeh Moghaddam, M., Ismailzadeh Moghari, A., & Khosravi Pour, N. (2022). The effect of auditors’ cognitive bias on the intellectual intelligence and style of the auditor. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 11(3), 341-355.
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.
Perera, D., Chand, P., & Mala, R. (2020). Confirmation bias in accounting judgments: The case for International Financial Reporting Standards for small and medium-sized enterprises. Accounting & Finance. 4(4), 4093-4119.
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.
Salehi, M., Ghaderi, A., Hashemisima, H., & Zahedi, Z. (2021). The relationship between different types of leadership, client’s identity, and self-confidence and auditors’ impartiality. The TQM Journal, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-01-2021-0022
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.
Seifzadeh, M., Salehi, M., Khanmohammadi, M., & Abedini, B. (2022). The relationship between management attributes and accounting comparability. Journal of Facilities Management, 20(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFM-08-2020-0058
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(4), 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.
Wason, P. (2003). Peter Wason (1924-2003) Thinking & Reasoning, 9 (3), 177-184
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.
Wright, B. A. (1988). Attitudes and the fundamental negative bias: Conditions and corrections. In H. E. Yuker (Ed.), Attitudes toward persons with disabilities (pp. 3–21). Springer Publishing Company.
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.