International Business Research; Vol. 11, No.

11; 2018
ISSN 1913-9004 E-ISSN 1913-9012
Published by Canadian Center of Science and Education

Factors Influencing Professional Judgment of Auditors in Malaysia

Hazianti Abdul Halim1, Hartini Jaafar1, Sharul Effendy Janudin1
1
Senior Lecturer, Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management and Economics, Universiti
Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, Malaysia
Correspondence: Hazianti Abdul Halim, Department of Accounting and Finance, Faculty of Management and
Economics, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, Malaysia.

Received: September 19, 2018 Accepted: October 10, 2018 Online Published: October 16, 2018
doi:10.5539/ibr.v11n11p119 URL: https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v11n11p119

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the factors influencing professional judgment of Malaysian auditors. A
questionnaire was used to measure the level of professional judgment and factors influencing the judgment such
as gender, knowledge, position level, experience and also firm size. The multiple regression results showed that
the position level and experience to be statistically significant in determining the level of professional judgment
of auditors. Gender, knowledge and firm size have no significant relationship with professional judgment. As for
gender, past research has shown mixed results and this study proves that there is no gender differences among
Malaysian auditors in terms of their professional judgment. Even though past research has shown that knowledge
has a positive relationship with professional judgment, this study finds no significant relationship between the
two variables. With regard to firm size, this study finds similar results of prior study that there is no significant
relationship between firm size and judgment. In terms of the practical implications, this study provides insights
into significant factors that influence professional judgment of Malaysian auditors. Besides, the management of
audit firms can place emphasis on establishing training to their employees especially for the junior staff.
Exposing junior auditors at the early stage might improve their professional judgment when facing with
complexities of assignments.
Keywords: auditors, Malaysia, professional judgment
1. Introduction
Professional judgment among accounting professionals has always been a subject to scrutiny both in practice and
also literature. In auditing, professional judgement is about practising related knowledge and experience in
auditing based on the accounting and auditing standards and professional code of ethics to make a sound
decision-making. In addition, the accounting and auditing discipline has increasingly recognised professional
judgment as one of the highly important attributes in the profession. Besides financial reporting, which are
influenced by factors such as accounting standards, economic factors and professional ethics and responsibilities,
auditing also involved a critical professional judgement. The public can rely on an auditor's representations when
confidence exists that the auditor has acted as an impartial judge, basing conclusions on objective evidence
(Mansouri, Pirayesh, & Salehi, 2009).
The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) issues international standards for auditing
and other assurance and related services and these standards are now used by more 100 countries in the world. In
addition to this, there is also the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants (By-Laws on Code of
Ethics) that issues ethical standards and guidance for use by professional accountants. In Malaysia, the
Malaysian Institute of Accountants (MIA) has adopted this standard and renamed the code as MIA By-Laws
(Eilisfsen et. al, 2014) and this code provides guidelines for professional accountants with regard to fundamental
ethical principles.
Because financial statement audits play an important role in economy, the public put absolute trust in accounting
and auditing professionals as these profession exemplified high moral values and integrity (Haron, Ismail,
Ibrahim, & Na, 2014). Auditors should maintain a high standard of professional conduct and exercise
professional judgment in their work, failure of which, may result in civil damages or even criminal penalties. In
addition, professionalism means using technical and communication skills and values. Unbiased professional
judgement by auditors is an important assumption of professional standards. However, the complexities of

119
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

today‟s accounting and auditing process become one of the serious challenges to auditors (Heyrani, Banimahd, &
Roudposhti, 2016).
Prior research has documented that there are various factors that could influence how auditors exercise their
professional judgement. For example, personal characteristics such as gender influences how auditors behave.
For example, with regard to higher ethical values female are less likely to engage in unethical behaviour as
compared to male (Haron et al., 2014). In addition to gender, cultural factors such as different races also
influence the behaviour of auditors (Patel, Harrison, & McKinnon, 2002). Besides personal characteristics,
factors such as audit work environment, auditor‟s independence, audit evidences and the process of decision
making do influence professional judgment of auditors. Therefore, it is argued in this study that there are
different factors that could influence how auditors in Malaysia exercise their professional judgment, particularly
in addressing the new auditor‟s report with the new key audit matters. Therefore, the objectives of this study are
(i) to examine the level of professional judgment of auditor and (ii) to identify the factors influencing
professional judgment of auditors in Malaysia, namely gender, culture, firm size, position level and experience.
In order to achieve these objectives, six research questions are formulated which are:
1) What is the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors?
2) Does gender influence professional judgment of Malaysian auditors?
3) Does knowledge influence professional judgement of Malaysian auditors?
4) Does position level influence professional judgement of Malaysian auditors?
5) Does experience influence professional judgement of Malaysian auditors?
6) Does firm size influence professional judgement of Malaysian auditors?
This study makes important theoretical contributions. This is because it extends the literature of factors
influencing professional judgement of auditors by providing information on experience and also position level of
auditors particularly among Malaysian auditors. From a practical perspective, this research is expected to benefit
the professional accountants and also auditors as best practices mechanisms can work toward effective
professional judgement. This research benefits the regulatory bodies such as MASB and MIA in order to help
them strengthening the profession.
1.1 Literature Review
With regard to professional judgment of auditors, a stream of research has been conducted to determine the level
of professional judgment and its various contributing factors. These studies have examined factors such as
personal characteristics and experience of auditors, firm size, and also position level regarding what and how
these factors influenced auditors‟ professional judgement. However, prior studies provide inconsistent results
regarding the factors related to professional judgment. Therefore, further investigations are necessary so that
issues that hinder the consistencies of results can be addressed and more conclusive evidence can be drawn.
In essence, the principles-based approach requires accountants to make professional judgments on the substance
rather than their legal form (Agoglia, Doupnik, & Tsakumis, 2011; Psaros & Trotman, 2004). Bennett, Bradbury,
& Prangnell (2006) argued that a relatively more principles-based standards regime requires professional
judgment at both the transaction level (substance over form) and at the financial statement level („true and fair
view‟ override). This is because the IFRS require exercise of more professional judgement. Judgement has
always been a critical issue of both the preparation and of audits of financial statements. In this regard, concerns
about the subjectivity and possible variability of accountants' judgements cast some doubt on the operational
effectiveness of the conceptual approach. Some has also argued that to some extent principles-based approach
leads to biased financial reporting (Bennett et al., 2006). This is due to the fact that the IFRS allow preparers to
apply judgement in selecting reporting methods, estimates and disclosures that match firms‟ underlying
economics. The use of judgement, however, also presents the opportunity for management to select methods and
estimates to achieve desired earnings figure (Smieliauskas, 2012).
1.2 Factors Influencing Professional Judgement
Prior research documented that there are various factors that can be associated with good professional judgement.
According to Emby & Gibbins (1987) expectation, outcome, and justification perspectives on judgment quality
are among factors that influence the accountants‟ judgement. From the perspective of public accountants, they
see these factors as important in defining good judgment with variations related to position (level of
responsibility). This study is supported by Ponemon (1990) who documented that there is an association between
the way in which auditors resolve dilemma and their position level. Although the primary focus of good auditor

120
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

judgments and audit quality is at the early stage, the current regulatory environment and the structure of audit
firms are of increased importance in influencing those judgments. These factors also influence the independence
and professional scepticism of auditors and how audit evidence combines with auditor knowledge, traits, and
incentives to produce judgments that reflect professional scepticism (Wedemeyer, 2010).
1.2.1 Gender
Auditor judgment is observed as one of the most important elements of a financial statement audit and defined as
“any decision or evaluation made by an auditor, which influences or governs the process and outcome of an audit
of financial statements” (Wedemeyer, 2010). Auditors use their judgments when they make major decisions
such as: “(1) the assessment of the risks of material misstatements of financial statements, including the potential
effects of fraud, bias and business risk; (2) the identification, performance and assessment of audit procedures to
address those risks; (3) the evaluation of audit evidence to determine the quality and meaning of that evidence
and to assess the need for additional evidence based on the process; and (4) the formation of an opinion on the
financial statements and the decision whether or not to express that opinion” (Wedemeyer, 2010).
Gender has typically been treated as a personal characteristic or an indicator which is supposed affect both
affective and continuous commitment. In other words, the influence of some organisational practices may be
different for men and women (Haron et al., 2014). For example Fumagalli et al. (2010) find that moral
judgment does differ between gender. In addition to that, Shawver and Clements (2015) indicate that female
accountants were more sensitive to business situations involving earnings management and viewed earnings
management actions as less ethical than male accountants. In a study involving 166 participants from business
classes, Barnett, Brown, and Bass (1994) examined the ethical judgments of the students regarding 24
business-related scenarios. These scenarios included, amongst others, “a worker passing blame for errors to an
innocent co-worker, a worker claiming credit for someone else‟s work, an employee following management
directives and not informing an auto manufacturer about a faulty component part, a manager authorizing a
subordinate to violate company rules, a management decision that violates the privacy of subjects during a
marketing research study” (Barnett, Brown & Bass, 1994, p.335). The results of their study showed significant
differences in the ethical judgments of participants based on gender in 22 of the 24 cases, with male students
judging all the actions described in the scenarios to be less unethical than the female students. These gender
differences, as Barnett, Brown, and Bass (1994) further explained, indicated that males‟ moral development
might be slower than that of females, or that males‟ approach towards moral dilemmas might be more pragmatic.
Previous behavioural accounting research focusing on gender differences in auditors‟ judgments has produced
mixed results. While some researchers have seen no differences in judgments between male and female auditors
(Haron et al., 2014; Jamilah, Fanani, & Chandr, 2007; Ponemon, 1990; Setiawan, 2018) others have found
empirical evidence of significant gender differences in decision-making processes (Chung & Monroe, 2001,
Pajouh & Martin, 2018). A study on auditors by Chung & Monroe (2001) find that gender plays an important
role with regard to audit judgment. It was argued that female auditors were more accurate as compared to their
male counterparts. It can be argued that this lack of gender differences may be caused by work-related
socialisation, occupational roles, similar training, the structure of the business world, and professional standards.
1.2.2 Knowledge
A considerable amount of research associated with auditor judgment has produced several concerns about how
knowledge might affect the approach to audit judgment and to help auditors in better decision making (Mala &
Chand, 2015). Auditors acquire knowledge through education, training, and experience (Bhattacharjee &
Moreno, 2002). In this regard, a considerable amount of research have been carried out to determine how audit
tasks are carried out and what kind of education and training would assist individuals, which include how
knowledge might affect the approach to judgment and help in better decision making (Mala & Chand, 2014).
1.2.3 Position Level
Studies on ethical behaviour found that individuals of higher rank have a stronger sense of obligation to their
profession than those in a lower rank. This means the attention to ethical principles increases as the level of
responsibilities increases. In earlier study, Ponemon (1990) investigate possible relationship between moral
reasoning and position and found that auditors‟ position level in the firm influence ethical reasoning and
judgment. This is because, according to the study, higher position means auditors pays more attention to external
forces such as firm‟s profit. Moreover, auditors who hold a higher position such managers and partners display
greater management skills than auditors of lower position. However, (Haron et al., 2014) find no significant
relationship between position level and ethical judgment.

121
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

1.2.4 Experience
Besides knowledge and position level, experience has also been identified as possible factors that may influence
an auditor‟s performance. Bonner (1994) note that although experienced auditors have a stronger performance
than auditors with less experience and knowledge, they provide a better explanation for the difference in their
performance. In addition, Libby & Frederick (1990) find that experienced auditors have a more complete
understanding of the errors in the financial statement and are able to explain them. They conclude that
experienced auditors can reach a proper conclusion more quickly than their less experienced colleagues.
In another study, Bhattacharjee & Moreno (2002) find that more experienced auditors are able to ignore
irrelevant information while making judgment while less experienced auditors are not. Less experienced auditors
incorporated irrelevant negative information into their judgment, resulting in higher risk assessment ratings.
Quite recently, Farma, Karamoy, & Datu (2016) ; Limen, Karamoy, & Gamaliel (2017) and Rí os-figueroa & Este
(2013) examine whether experience could affect the professional judgment of auditors during the planning phase
of an audit. However, they discover that experience does not significantly affect professional judgment. In other
words, auditors with less experience does not seem to have a significant difference on professional judgment.
1.2.5 Firm size
Some studies argue that how auditors behave including their independence is influenced by the size of audit
firms (Abu Bakar & Ahmad, 2009). These studies observed that as the number of dilemmas faced by small firms‟
personnel increases, the level of moral reasoning increases (Clarke et al 1996). Generally, small audit firm do not
have formal in-house training on which to rely. However, Sweeney (1995) find that firm size is not related to
moral practice and judgment. Likewise, Haron et al. (2014) find no significant relationship between firm size and
ethical judgment.
1.3 Hypotheses Development

Figure 1. Theoretical Framework

Figure 1 shows the theoretical framework for this study. Based on the theoretical framework of the current study,
five general hypotheses are developed.
1.3.1 Professional Judgment and Gender
Findings related to the influence of gender on professional judgment are mixed. Some studies have suggested
that with regard to professional judgment, women are more prominent, whereas others have reported that gender
and professional judgement are not correlated. Based on the discussion presented in the previous section,
findings regarding gender and professional judgment are mixed and, therefore, this hypothesis is proposed:
H1: Gender influence the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors.
1.3.2 Professional Judgment and Knowledge
A considerable amount of research have been carried out to determine how audit tasks are carried out and the
types of education and training would assist individuals, or how knowledge might affect the approach to
judgment and help in better decision making (Mala & Chand, 2014). Therefore, the next hypothesis is proposed:
H2: Knowledge and the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors are positively related.
1.3.3 Professional Judgment and Position Level
As previously discussed, many studies on ethical behaviour found that individuals with higher position have a
stronger sense of commitment or obligation to their profession than those in a lower position. Therefore, the
following hypothesis is proposed:
H3: Position level and the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors are positively related.

122
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

1.3.4 Professional Judgment and Experience

In this study, we consider whether the number of years of experience of auditors influence their level of
professional judgment. This is because some studies conclude that experienced auditors perform better than their
less experienced colleagues. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H4: Experience and the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors are positively related.
1.3.5 Professional Judgment and Firm Size
As previously discussed, some studies argue that behaviour of auditors is influenced by the size of audit firms.
They highlighted that as the number of dilemmas faced by small firms‟ personnel increases, the level of moral
reasoning increases. Therefore, the following hypothesis is proposed:
H5: Firm size and the level of professional judgment of Malaysian auditors are positively related.
2. Method
Data were collected using survey questionnaire administered to the following groups: senior auditors, junior
auditors and audit managers of audit firms in the Klang Valley area. The questionnaires were distributed during
May to July 2018. A total of 55 usable responses were received. The questionnaires consist of three sections.
Section A requires demographic information such as gender, age, religion, years of experience, professional
qualification, position level and also company category. Section B measures knowledge and Section C measures
professional judgment. Four statements measure knowledge and eight statement measures professional judgment.
These sections require respondents to choose the appropriate response from the 5-point Likert scale from one
(strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree). The responses derived from the questionnaires are coded, entered and
analysed by using the SPSS statistical package. The questionnaire was pilot tested by administering the
questionnaire to final year accounting students in one of public universities in Malaysia. Their feedback was
recorded and several additional changes were made. A reliability test was carried out to ensure the internal
consistency of the instrument. All items possessed Cronbach‟s Alpha‟s value of more than 80% and this indicates
that the internal consistency of the instrument is good and therefore, acceptable.

123
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

3. Results
3.1 Profile of Respondents
Table 1. Profile of Respondents

Table 1 shows that 33% of the respondents are male and 67% female. Based on the table, almost 80% of the
respondents are Muslim. The respondents are mostly below 26 years old and possessed a degree. Around 20% of
the respondents possessed professional qualifications. In addition to that, 66% of the respondents hold junior
position and 34% hold senior and managerial position. This explains the number of years of experience because
77% of the respondents have less than four years as auditor. Finally, 25% of the respondents are from Big Four
firms and the remaining are from Non-Big-Four firms.
3.1 Mean Value of Professional Judgment
Section C has eight statements that measure the level of professional judgement of the respondents. Respondents
were asked to rate their responses through a 5-point Likert scale of one (strongly disagree) to five (strongly agree).
3.2 Hypotheses Testing
Multiple Regression Analysis
The basic model is:
PROFJUDG= β0 + β1 GENDER + β2 KNOWLEDGE + β3 POSITION LEVEL + β4 EXPERIENCE + β5

124
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

FIRM SIZE + €
All assumption of the model, including the normality of the error term, homoscedasticity, autocorrelation,
linearity of the relationship and independent of the independent variables were fulfilled.
Table 2. Multiple Regression Results

Dependent Variable: Professional Judgment

*Significant at 5% confidence level (p<0.05)
The regression results indicate that 47% of the variation in professional judgment level is explained by
independent variables. Results show that position level and experience are significant at 5% significance level.
Both variables show a positive relationship with professional judgement. The other variables are not significant
in relation to professional judgment.
4. Discussion
Overall, this study developed five (5) hypotheses. H1 related to the influence of gender on the level of professional
judgment of Malaysian auditors. The expectation was that gender would, to some extent influence the level of
professional judgment of auditors. However, the results show no significant influence of gender with regards to
professional judgment; hence, does not provide support to H1. The results of this study support findings by Haron
et al (2014), Jamilah et al (2007) and Ponemon (1990) that in terms of judgment, there is no differences between
male and female auditors. This lack of gender differences may be caused by work-related socialization, similar
training and also the professional standards that may eliminate differences between male and female auditors.
H2 expected a positive association between professional judgment and knowledge. However, the results showed
no association between the variables. Hence, H2 is not supported. It can be argued here that even though auditors
acquire knowledge through education and training (Bhattacharjee & Moreno, 2002), knowledge is not significant
in explaining the variation in professional judgment. H3 predicted a positive relationship between professional
judgment and position level. Position level was found to be statistically significant and therefore, provide support
for H3. However, an earlier study conducted in Malaysia found no significant relationship between position level
and judgment (Haron et al, 2014). It was argued in the study that more stringent rules and regulations will
change the judgment of auditors. The higher the auditors perceived the ethical climate of the organisation, the
more ethical they will be and not because of their position level. In contrast, our findings is similar to Ponemon
(1990) and Praditaningrum (2012) who found that position level is positively associated with the level of
judgment of auditors.
H4 posited a positive relationship between experience and professional judgment. The results revealed a
significant positive relationship between experience and professional judgment of Malaysian auditors and hence,
provide support for H4. This results are similar to prior studies which found that experience have positive and
significant impacts on audit judgment (Bhattacharjee & Moreno, 2002; Griffith et al, 2017; Mala & Chand, 2014
and Safi‟i & Jayanto, 2015). Therefore, it can be concluded that more experienced Malaysian auditors provide
higher level of professional judgment as compared to their counterparts. The final hypothesis, H5 expected a
positive association between firm size and professional judgment. However, the results revealed no significant
relationship between both variables, leading H5 to be rejected.
The purpose of this study was to examine the factors influencing professional judgment of Malaysian auditors.
Influencing factors were classified as personal factors and organizational factors. The multiple regression results
showed that the position level and experience to be statistically significant in determining the level of professional
judgment of auditors. Gender, knowledge and firm size have no significant relationship with professional judgment.
As for gender, past research has shown mixed results and this study proves that there is no gender differences

125
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

among Malaysian auditors in terms of their professional judgment. Even though past research has shown that
knowledge has a positive relationship with professional judgment, this study finds no significant relationship
between the two variables. With regard to firm size, this study finds similar results of prior Malaysian study (Haron
et al., 2014) that there is no significant relationship between firm size and judgment.
This study offers several implications. In terms of the practical implications, this study provides insights into
significant factors that influence professional judgment of Malaysian auditors. Besides, the management of audit
firms can place emphasis on establishing training to their employees especially for the junior staff. Exposing
junior auditors at the early stage might improve their professional judgment when facing with complexities of
assignments. Despite the implications, this study is still subject to several limitations. The limitations may affect
the usefulness and generalizability of this study. However, they can serve as basis for future research. First, this
study used representative sampling and it may not be representative of Malaysian auditors because of the small
sample size. Future studies should attempt for a larger sample size than this study for representativeness of the
Malaysian auditor‟s population. Secondly, this study involves the use of questionnaire survey only. Future
studies may attempt to adopt a different approach such as the interviews or case study questions to better
evaluate the factors influencing professional judgment of auditors.
Acknowledgement
This work was funded by Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris under University Research Grant Code
2017-0516-106-01.
References
Aasmund, E., William, F., Messier, Jr., Steven, M. G. , Douglas, F. P., Samsuwated, Z. M. A., … Aida, H. I. R. J.
J. (2014). Principle of Auditing & Assurance Services in Malaysia. McGraw Hill Book Education.
Abu Bakar, N. B., & Ahmad, M. (2009). Auditor Independence : Malaysian Accountants ‟ Perceptions.
International Journal of Business and Management, 4(12), 129–141. Retrieved from
www.ccsenet.org/journal.html
Agoglia, C. P., Doupnik, T. S., & Tsakumis, G. T. (2011). Principles-based versus rules-based accounting
standards: The influence of standard precision and audit committee strength on financial reporting
decisions. Accounting Review, 86(3), 747–767. https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.00000045
Bennett, B., Bradbury, M., & Prangnell, H. (2006). Rules, principles and judgments in accounting standards.
Abacus, 42(2), 189-204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2006.00197.x
Bhattacharjee, S., & Moreno, K. (2002). The Impact of Affective Information on the Professional Judgments of
More Experienced and Less Experienced Auditors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(4),
361-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.420
Emby, C., & Gibbins, M. (1987). Good judgment in public accounting: Quality and justification. Contemporary
Accounting Research, 4(1), 287-313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1987.tb00668.x
Farma, I., Karamoy, H., & Datu, C. (2016). Analisis Faktor- Faktor Audit Judgment. Jurnal EMBA, 5(1), 20-29.
Fumagalli, M., Ferrucci, R., Mameli, F., Marceglia, S., Mrakic-Sposta, S., Zago, S., … Priori, A. (2010).
Gender-related differences in moral judgments. Cognitive Processing, 11(3), 219-226.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-009-0335-2
Haron, H., Ismail, I., Ibrahim, D. N., & Na, A. Lo. (2014). Factors influencing ethical judgment of auditors in
Malaysia. Malaysian Accounting Review, 13(2).
Heyrani, F., Banimahd, B., & Roudposhti, F. R. (2016). Investigation of the Effect of Auditors‟ Professionalism
Levels on their Judgment to Resolve the Conflict between Auditor and Management. Procedia Economics
and Finance, 36(16), 177-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30029-6
Jamilah, S., Fanani, Z., & Chandr, G. (2007). Pengaruh Gender, Tekanan Ketaatan, dan Kompleksitas Tugas
terhadap Audit Judgment. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 10, 1-30.
Limen, M. M. P., Karamoy, H., & Gamaliel, H. (2017). Analisi faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi audit judgment
pada auditor. Jurnal Riset Akuntansi Going Concern, 12(2).
Mala, R., & Chand, P. (2014). Impacts of additional guidance provided on international financial reporting
standards on the judgments of accountants. International Journal of Accounting, 49(2), 263-288.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intacc.2014.04.008

126
http://ibr.ccsenet.org International Business Research Vol. 11, No. 11; 2018

Mala, R., & Chand, P. (2015). Judgment and decision-making research in auditing and accounting: Future
research implications of person, task, and environment perspective. Accounting Perspectives, 14(1), 1-50.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12040
Mansouri, A., Pirayesh, R., & Salehi, M. (2009). Audit Competence and Audit Quality: Case in Emerging
Economy. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(2), 17-25.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v4n2p17
Pajouh, M. S., & Martin, M. (2018). The Impact of Culture on Globalisation and Role of Women in
Management : The case of the Iranian Hotel Industry.
Patel, C., Harrison, G. L., & McKinnon, J. L. (2002). Cultural influences on judgments of professional
accountants in auditor–client conflict resolution. Journal of International Financial Management &
Accounting, 13(1), 1-31.
Ponemon, L. A. (1990). Ethical judgments in accounting: A cognitive developmental perspective. Critical
Perspectives on Accounting, 1(December 1989), 191-215.
Psaros, J., & Trotman, K. T. (2004). The impact of the type of accounting standards on preparers‟ judgments.
Abacus, 40(1), 76-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6281.2004.00144.x
os-figueroa, C. B., & Este, U. (2013). Does experience affect auditors‟ professional judgment? evidence from
Rí
puerto rico, 5(2), 13-32.
Setiawan, W. Y. (2018). Gender Differences in Auditors‟ Judgments: Evidence from Indonesia. Review of
Integrative Business and Economics Research, 7(1), 350-358.
Smieliauskas, W. (2012). Principles-Based Reasoning about Accounting Estimates. Accounting Perspectives,
11(4), 259-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12001
Wedemeyer, P. D. (2010). A discussion of auditor judgment as the critical component in audit quality- A
practitioner‟s perspective. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 7(4), 320-333.
https://doi.org/10.1057/jdg.2010.19

Copyrights
Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

127