JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282

http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in

improving audit quality: A path analysis
M.F. Arrozi Adhikara1*, Agung Mulyo Widodo2
1
Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Esa Unggul University,
Jakarta, Indonesia
2
Post-Doctoral Fellowship, Computer Science & Information Engineering, Asia University,
Taichung City, Taiwan, Province of China
*Corresponding Author(s) Email: arrozi@esaunggul.ac.id

ABSTRACT

This study investigates the relationship between JEL Code:

behavioral observation responses, namely accountability, D83, M42, M49
due professional care, and professional skepticism, and
their collective influence on audit quality within public DOI:
accounting firms. By highlighting the mediating role of 10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616
professional skepticism, our study offers a model that
integrates cognitive dissonance theory with attribution Article History:
theory, thereby advancing understanding in the field. Received 2023-08-12
Furthermore, this study employs a one-shot study Reviewed 2023-09-18
approach with individual auditors as the unit of analysis. Revised 2023-10-12
Data was collected through surveys administered to Accepted 2023-10-25
auditors working in public accounting firms registered
with The Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Licensed:
Accountants in Jakarta. The sample comprised 123 CC-BY
auditors selected via Stratified Random Sampling. Path
analysis using the AMOS program was employed for How to Cite:
data analysis. The results indicate that when auditors feel Arrozi Adhikara, M. F., &
a sense of accountability and exercise due professional Widodo, A. M. (2023). Public
care, they are more inclined to approach their work with accountant professional
heightened skepticism, positively influencing audit
skepticism behavior in improving
quality. This suggests that accountability and due
audit quality: A path analysis.
professional care serve as catalysts for fostering a critical
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang
mindset among auditors. Consequently, the combined
Akuntansi dan Manajemen,
impact of these factors, along with professional
20(2), 264-282. doi:
skepticism, significantly contributes to enhancing audit
10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616
quality, highlighting the interconnectedness of these
elements in driving effective auditing practices.

Keywords: Behavioral Observations; Accountability;

Due Professional Care; Professional
Skepticism; Audit Quality

264
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

Introduction

The public accounting field faces ongoing challenges in enhancing the quality of audit
reports, both in attestation and non-attestation services. Assessing the accuracy of financial
statements is crucial for informed business decisions (Defond et al., 2021). However, the
demand for reliable financial reports has raised various new issues (Collemi, 2016). The
International Forum of Independent Audit Regulators (IFIAR) notes slow progress in audit
quality improvement, with significant deficiencies identified in financial statement audits,
particularly in areas such as fair value measurement, internal control testing, risk assessment,
and revenue recognition. These audit shortcomings often lead to material misstatements,
creating discrepancies between auditor and auditee expectations and resulting in conflicts of
interest as auditors receive increasing workloads. As many as 75% of 1,500 audit committees
from 35 countries stated that their responsibilities continue to grow each year and become
difficult due to the limited time and ability of the audit committee in cybersecurity,
communication gaps with top managers, and auditors' lack of understanding of the strategy
and risks of the company being audited. Ethical breaches, such as auditing standards
violations in fraud cases and collusion scandals between auditors and regulatory agency
employees, further exacerbate concerns, leading to the suspension of public accounting firms'
licenses (La Torre et al., 2021; Macnish & Van der Ham, 2020; Nasution & Östermark,
2020).
This trend highlights a decline in audit quality attributed to insufficient skepticism and
due professional care (Louwers et al., 2008). Addressing this decline necessitates robust audit
quality control measures encompassing leadership responsibility, engagement performance,
adherence to ethical standards, human resources management, client acceptance and
continuance procedures, and ongoing monitoring. Therefore, auditors must adopt a
professional and cautious skeptical stance, remain proactive, and continually enhance their
technical and soft skills, including negotiation abilities (Collemi, 2016).
The primary focus of this study is to delve into the issue of audit quality within public
accounting firms, particularly in addressing trust concerns regarding the reliability of audit
outcomes (Persellin et al., 2019). Such insights are pivotal for informed business decision-
making (Kythreotis & Soltani, 2023) and for bolstering confidence in financial statement
accuracy through empirical evidence of audit quality (Werner et al., 2021; Hutabarat et al.,
2022), aligning with professional standards for financial statement fairness. Factors
influencing audit quality stem from behavioral responses both internally and externally

265
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

(Gordon & Graham, 2010), alongside the auditor's sense of responsibility for audit outcomes
(Kim et al., 2015) and indicators of skepticism and due professional care (Louwers et al.,
2008).
This study adopts a cognitive dissonance theory perspective (Festinger, 1957) to predict
audit quality, with skepticism being a key determinant. The theory posits that auditor
skepticism arises when there's a dissonance between auditors' trust in the client and the risk
assessment provided by their supervisor. Variations in audit quality outcomes may stem from
ethical discrepancies influenced by audit contract obligations, necessitating auditors to
uphold accountability (Low & Tan, 2011). The ethical code promotes adherence to auditing
standards (Phan et al., 2020), with individuals critical of the audit process more inclined
towards distrust (Zarefar & Zarefar, 2016), demonstrating a positive relationship between due
professional care and accountability (Zahmatkesh & Rezazadeh, 2017). However, skepticism
may emerge regarding auditee financial performance due to distrust in financial reporting and
conflicts of interest (Ta et al., 2022; Griffith et al., 2012).
This study is urgent due to the conflict of interest arising from audit quality, leading to
expectation gaps between auditors and auditees, potentially resulting in material
misstatements and information asymmetry (Edosa et al., 2013). Moreover, there is a dearth of
research on professional skepticism in developing countries like Indonesia, where auditors
may face unique challenges. This study proposes to mediate professional skepticism to
address these challenges. By examining the application of ethics codes, including
accountability, independence, and due professional care, this research aims to provide
empirical evidence of audit quality. The findings of this study offer significant contributions
by expanding the discourse on auditor accountability and its influence on professional
skepticism within public accounting firms. Additionally, it integrates individual attitudes and
characteristics to better understand and judge auditor expertise and experience based on
conceptualizing the public accountant's code of ethics.

Literature Review

Attribution and Cognitive Dissonance Theory

Initially formulated by Fritz Heider in 1958, Attribution theory explores how individuals
interpret events and determine the causes behind their behavior (Luthans, 1998, as cited in
Tandiontong, 2016). Heider proposed that behavior results from a combination of internal
and external forces. Internal factors, such as personal abilities stemming from one's nature,
character, attitude, expertise, and effort, shape an individual's performance. In contrast,

266
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

external factors, such as situational pressures, challenges, or luck, also play a role (Utari et
al., 2021). Internal behavior is perceived as within an individual's control, whereas external
behavior is viewed as a response to external circumstances (Wahidahwati & Asyik, 2022;
Kamil, 2015; Samuji et al., 2022). This framework sheds light on the factors contributing to
specific events, including those relevant to auditors' performance. Our study leverages
attribution theory to explore the influences shaping auditors' conduct during assignments,
particularly focusing on the personal qualities of auditors (the level of professional
skepticism).
Cognitive dissonance theory, which complements attribution theory, was also formulated
in the late 1950s, primarily by Leon Festinger. This theory delves into the discomfort
individuals experience when holding conflicting beliefs or attitudes. According to Festinger,
individuals strive for cognitive consistency and seek to align their beliefs and behaviors to
reduce this discomfort (Festinger, 1957). Cognitive dissonance theory can elucidate how
auditors reconcile conflicting information or findings during the audit process. Cognitive
dissonance may arise when auditors encounter discrepancies between their expectations and
audit evidence. For instance, if auditors strongly believe in the client's integrity but uncover
evidence suggesting fraudulent activity, they experience cognitive dissonance. To alleviate
this discomfort, auditors may adjust their beliefs to align with the evidence or seek additional
information to justify their initial beliefs.
Professional skepticism plays a crucial role in how auditors navigate cognitive
dissonance. Professional skepticism as a multidimensional form will identify the tendency of
each individual to delay a conclusion before obtaining sufficiently strong evidence (Hurtt,
2010). Instead of succumbing to the pressure to maintain their initial beliefs, skeptical
auditors are more likely to critically evaluate the evidence and seek additional information to
resolve inconsistencies. They remain vigilant and objective, prioritizing the reliability of
financial reporting over personal biases or preconceived notions. By integrating cognitive
dissonance theory with the concept of professional skepticism, our study can better
understand how auditors maintain objectivity during the audit process.

The Relationship between Due Professional Care, Professional Skepticism, and Audit
Quality

Due professional care refers to auditors' responsible conduct, incorporating professional

skepticism. Auditors apply their expertise and diligence in conducting audits, ensuring
thorough reporting to clients and supervisors. The credibility of financial reports hinges on

267
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

auditors exercising professional skepticism throughout the audit process (Glover & Prawitt,
2014). Failure to maintain professional skepticism can lead to legal challenges post-audit.
Moreover, if auditors neglect to adopt a skeptical stance or do so inadequately during audits,
their audit opinions lose their utility (Cohen et al., 2017). Interestingly, assessment findings
reveal that auditors engaged in joint audits exhibit the least skepticism when evaluating
business continuity assumptions. Joint audits may inadvertently influence auditors' behaviors
(Hoos & Lander, 2019; Ying & Patel, 2016).

H1: There is a positive relationship between professional due care and professional
skepticism.

Moreover, auditors acknowledge their responsibility towards client management and

colleagues professionally, ensuring accurate information regarding financial statements is
considered about the type of audit opinion to be rendered. Enhanced professionalism among
auditors correlates with improved audit quality in financial statements. Upholding
professional standards can elevate auditor professionalism, thereby enhancing audit quality.
These findings align with those of Glover and Prawitt (2014), illustrating that professionalism
significantly contributes to audit quality. Additionally, Holm and Zaman (2012), Kusumawati
and Syamsuddin (2018), and Dermarkar and Hazgui (2022) affirm that professionalism is
individually and significantly linked to audit quality.

H2: Due professional care and audit quality have a positive relationship.

The Relationship between Accountability, Professional Skepticism, and Audit Quality

Auditor accountability refers to the auditor's sense of responsibility for their actions in
fulfilling professional duties. Krishna and Nadya (2020) added that a psychological motivator
prompts auditors to take responsibility for their actions and decisions. This accountability
directly influences professional skepticism during the examination process, particularly in
acquiring and evaluating audit evidence. Auditors are expected to approach audits with
professional skepticism, acknowledging the potential for financial statement misstatements.
The perceived level of social presence in the audit environment shapes auditor skepticism,
with increased accountability leading to heightened skepticism over time (Sorensen &
Ortegren, 2021; Kim & Trotman, 2015). Previous studies indicate that novice auditors exhibit
a greater increase in professional skepticism compared to more senior auditors under
conditions of process accountability (Kim & Trotman, 2014; Endrawes et al., 2023).

H3: Accountability influences professional skepticism positively.

268
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

Furthermore, when faced with evidence contradicting initial audit findings, the pressure
of accountability and time constraints heighten concerns about reputation loss and the
potential for concealing audit evidence (Barzideh & Kheirollahi, 2012). Studies by Furiady
and Kurnia (2015) and Krishna and Nadya (2020) underscore the significant impact of
accountability on the quality of auditors' work. It compels public accountants to assume
responsibility for their actions and fulfill their roles and duties with diligence and
accountability.

H4: Accountability affects audit quality positively.

The Relationship between Professional Skepticism and Audit Quality

Professional skepticism embodies an auditor's curiosity, entailing continuous questioning

and critical assessment of audit evidence (Glover & Prawitt, 2014). It arises when auditors
neither assume nor dismiss management's honesty outright, instead maintaining a vigilant
stance (Ying & Patel, 2016). Auditors are urged not to settle for inconclusive responses based
solely on the presumption of management's integrity. Hurtt et al. (2013) and Lamba et al.
(2020) assert that professional skepticism involves consistently questioning and critically
evaluating audit evidence. Possessing professional skepticism is imperative for auditors as it
enhances the quality of their audits. A high level of auditor curiosity aids in effectively
evaluating audit evidence, thereby uncovering any financial irregularities or fraud perpetrated
by client management. Studies by Phan et al. (2020), Gul et al. (2013), and Hurtt et al. (2013)
demonstrate a significant relationship between skepticism and audit quality, indicating that
heightened auditor skepticism improves the acquisition of evidence related to examining
client financial statements.

H5: There is a positive relationship between professional skepticism and audit quality.

Methods

This study employs an explanatory causal research design to examine the simultaneous
impact of due professional care (DPC), accountability (ACC), and professional skepticism
(SKP) on audit quality (AQL). The study has a one-shot time horizon and individual auditors
as the unit of analysis. Data collection involves a survey through a questionnaire targeting
registered auditors with The Indonesian Institute of Certified Public Accountants in Jakarta
aged 21-40 years. The population comprises auditors from 251 public accounting firms
meeting the criteria of junior auditors, senior auditors, and auditor managers. From a total
targeted population of 150 auditors, 123 were sampled using Stratified Random Sampling for

269
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Figure 1. Research Model

Table 1. Item, Factor loading, and Composite Reliability

Code Item Measurement Loading C.R.

Due Professional Care (DPC) 0.945
DPC1 Auditors audit with precision and expertise. 0.870
DPC2 Auditors exhibit resilience and dedication. 0.795
DPC3 Auditors possess technical skills and diligence. 0.671
DPC4 Auditors monitor for financial fraud. 0.675
DPC5 Auditors remain vigilant against risks. 0.785
DPC6 Auditors balance suspicion with trust. 0.649

Accountability (ACC) 0.955

ACC1 I am motivated to complete my tasks effectively. 0.810
ACC2 I believe that my work results will be reviewed by my superiors. 0.790
ACC3 I put in considerable effort and thought into completing tasks. 0.807
ACC4 I always adhere to the professional public accounting standard. 0.744

Professional Skepticism (SKP) 0.940

SKP1 I frequently inquire about things I observe or hear. 0.700
SKP2 I prefer to withhold judgment until I've examined all readily 0.615
accessible information.
SKP3 I enjoy comprehending the motives behind others' actions. 0.764

Audit Quality (AQL) 0.937

AQL1 The audit I did will be able to understood by users. 0.854
AQL2 The audit I perform will be relevant to the user's needs. 0.779
AQL3 The audit I perform will be relevant to the user's needs. 0.835
AQL4 The quality of the audits I perform will be comparable to users. 0.791

270
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

Table 2. Model Goodness Fit

Cut of Value Result Decision

Chi-Square (х2) Expected Small 0.115 Good Model
Sig. of Probability ≥ 0.05 0.428 Good Model
RMSEA ≤ 0.08 0.016 Good Model
GFI ≥ 0.90 0.913 Good Model
CMIN/DF ≤ 2.00 0.269 Good Model
TLI ≥ 0.95 0.950 Good Model
CFI ≥ 0.95 0.952 Good Model

this study. The questionnaire achieved a satisfactory return rate of 82%, which provides
ample data for conducting path analysis via AMOS. This rate is deemed sufficient, especially
for relatively simple models with anticipated strong relationships between variables. The
survey questionnaire utilizes a Likert scale to gather primary data from the target
respondents. This scale allows participants to rate their level of agreement or disagreement
with survey statements.
In this study, DPC refers to meticulous professional skill execution and is assessed
through indicators such as peer review, technical competence, auditor conduct, judgment,
business knowledge, and standards taken from Mansur (2007). On the other hand, ACC is
defined as a form of psychological encouragement that makes a person try to account for all
actions and decisions taken by his environment or others. Indicators of ACC are how much
motivation the subject has to complete the work, the extent of the subject's belief that the
results of their work will be checked by superiors (partners or managers), how much effort
(thinking power) the subject has to complete these jobs (Oussedik et al., 2019; Kim &
Trotman, 2014; Endrawes et al., 2023). While SKP is defined as the auditor's attitude that
brings an action to always ask questions and critically assess audit evidence measured with
questioning mind, suspension of judgement, and interpersonal understanding by Hurt (2010),
AQL represents the quality of decision-making and timely execution of work by auditors,
assessed through indicators such as understandability, relevance, reliability, and
comparability (Arens et al., 2017). In Figure 1, the study framework visually depicts the
complex interplay among due professional care, accountability, professional skepticism, and
audit quality, elucidating the causal pathways explored in the study. Table 1 offers a detailed
account of item measurements, validity, and reliability testing outcomes. The validity test is
used to measure the concept to be measured by the loading factor and is accepted if the
271
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

loading factor value is ≥ 0.5. Meanwhile, the reliability test is used to measure the
consistency of a variable and is accepted to provide a composite reliability value with a
minimum cut-off value of 0.6. The results of the validity test of each indicator of each
variable in Table 1 show the lowest loading factor of 0.6488, the highest is 0.8700, with the
lowest value of composite reliability (C.R.) of 0.937, and the highest is 0.955. Furthermore,
Table 2 provides an overview of the goodness-of-fit indices for the model. The Chi-Square
(χ2) value, which measures the discrepancy between the observed and expected covariance
matrices, is 0.115, indicating a good model fit as it falls below the expected small threshold.
The significance level of probability (Sig. of Probability) is 0.428, above the standard cutoff
of 0.05, further indicating a good model fit. The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) is 0.016, below the acceptable threshold of 0.08, suggesting a good fit of the
model to the data. The Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI) value of 0.913 exceeds the minimum
threshold of 0.90, indicating a satisfactory fit. Additionally, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI)
and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) both exceed the desired threshold of 0.95, with values of
0.952 and 0.950, respectively, suggesting a good model fit. Therefore, it can be concluded
that the model fits the data well and does not need to be modified. This means that there is a
match between the model and the empirical data.

Result and Discussion

Table 3 presents the demographic profiles of the study participants, comprising 123
individuals. Regarding gender, 45% of respondents identified as male, while 55% identified
as female. In terms of age distribution, 48% fell within the 21-30 age bracket, and 52% were
aged 31-40. Furthermore, 92% of participants held a Bachelor of Accounting degree, with 8%
possessing a Master of Accounting. Regarding job positions, 68% were junior auditors, 12%
were senior assistants, and 20% were senior auditors. Concerning length of service, 9% had
less than 3 years of experience, 60% had 3-5 years, 18% had 5-7 years, and 13% had over 7
years of experience. Notably, there were no respondents in managerial roles.
Table 4 shows the Chi-Square value of 0.115 with a probability of 0.428, indicating that
there's no significant difference between the theoretical model and the actual data, suggesting
that the audit quality model is influenced by due professional care, accountability, with
professional skepticism as mediation, is accepted. Additionally, all hypothesis tests from 1 to
5 are accepted because their probability values [P] are below 0.05 or their Critical Ratio
[C.R.] values are above 1.96 with a significance level of 5%. Moreover, the coefficient of
determination indicates how much influence the independent and intervening variables

272
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

collectively have on the dependent variable. The effect value of due professional care and
accountability on professional skepticism is 41%. Meanwhile, the combined influence of due
professional care, accountability, and professional skepticism on audit quality is 63.1%.

Table 3. Demographic Profiles

Profile Percentages Profile Percentages

Gender Education
Male 45% Manager 0%
Female 55% Junior 68 %
Age (Year Old) Senior Assistant 12 %
21-30 48 % Senior 20 %
31–40 52 % Length of Service
Education <3 years 9%
Bachelor of Accounting 92% 3-5 years 60%
Master of Accounting 8% 5-7 years 18%
>7 years 13%

Table 4. Direct Effect Results

Hypotheses Estimate S.E. C.R. P Decision

H1: DPC -> SKP 0.644 0.036 3.176 0.001 Accepted

H2: DPC -> AQL 0.213 0.068 2.918 0.017 Accepted
H3: ACC -> SKP 0.268 0.054 2.271 0.012 Accepted
H4: ACC -> AQL 0.481 0.089 3.723 0.001 Accepted
H5: SKP -> AQL 0.331 0.079 2.754 0.006 Accepted

Square Multiple R2 Chi-Square = 0.115

SKP = 0.410 P sig. = 0.428
AQL = 0.631 Covarian Determinant Matrix = 0.035

Table 5. Indirect Effect Results

ACC DPC
Variables
Direct Effect Indirect Effect Direct Effect Indirect Effect
SKP 0.346 0.000 0.167 0.000
AQL 0.029 0.217 0.119 0.310

273
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Figure 2. Model After Testing

The findings revealed a positive correlation between accountability and professional

skepticism among auditors. This implies that as auditors perceive higher levels of
accountability, their skepticism during the audit process also increases. This trend arises from
auditors' sense of responsibility to ensure accuracy and objectivity in gathering relevant
information and critically evaluating audit evidence. The implication is that auditors are
motivated to maintain vigilance and adopt an inquisitive attitude to detect potential fraud or
errors, knowing they are liable for the audit outcomes. These results align with prior studies
(Sorensen & Ortegren, 2021; Endrawes et al., 2023; Hoos et al., 2019), suggesting that
heightened accountability fosters professional skepticism by prompting auditors to mitigate
biases and enhance cognitive effort. Notably, this contrasts with the findings of Kim and
Trotman (2015), who found that novice auditors exhibit a more pronounced increase in
skepticism under process accountability compared to experienced auditors. This acceptance
reinforces the understanding that greater accountability among auditors fosters a more
vigilant and critical mindset, enhancing their ability to detect and address discrepancies in
audit processes effectively.
This study's findings also indicate a positive correlation between accountability and audit
quality. A higher level of accountability among auditors corresponds to better quality results
in audit practice. This is attributed to auditors demonstrating increased effort, critical
thinking, and responsibility, along with a commitment to gathering relevant facts and
maintaining objectivity in decision-making processes. Consequently, auditors are better
equipped to conduct thorough analyses, leveraging their knowledge and access to adequate
information and audit reviews. The implication of these findings is an enhancement in the
quality of audit outcomes. These results are consistent with Zahmatkesh and Rezazadeh's
274
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

(2017) study, which similarly identified the influence of accountability on audit quality.
Accountability signifies auditors' ability to complete audit tasks efficiently and punctually,
with confidence in the thoroughness of their work, as it undergoes careful review by
superiors and can be justified to employers. Additionally, studies by Barzideh and Kheirollahi
(2012), Hurley et al. (2019), and Kythreotis and Soltani (2023) have affirmed that auditors
exhibiting accountability tend to fulfill audit requirements promptly in accordance with
auditing standards. As a result, the quality of audit work is enhanced, leading to an overall
improvement in audit quality.
Furthermore, this study also found that due professional care has a positive effect on
professional skepticism and audit quality. Auditors who exhibit due professional care tend to
enhance their skepticism when conducting analytical procedures. This is because such
auditors actively seek relationships, feedback, and guidance from colleagues and clients,
possess robust audit competencies and programs, engage senior professionals in audit
practices, and diligently monitor and evaluate audit processes. Furthermore, they familiarize
themselves with the audit environment and client business operations, adhere to ethical
standards, gather pertinent audit findings, and make informed decisions. This meticulous
approach demands a curious, vigilant, and analytical mindset during the evaluation of audit
processes and findings, necessitating auditors to maintain a high level of skepticism towards
trust, fraud risk assessment, and auditee personality.
The prudent behavior exhibited by auditors generates cognitive dissonance when
reconciling discrepancies between low fraud risk assessments set by superiors and the
auditor's actual level of trust in the client. These findings corroborate the assertions made by
Cohen (2017) and Glover and Prawitt (2014), indicating that users trust financial reports
when auditors employ professional skepticism in the audit process. Adherence to ethical
principles during audits, as emphasized by Pflugrath et al. (2007) and Collemi (2016),
significantly influences auditor decision-making and helps prevent audit failures. Due
professional care, integral to auditors' ethical conduct, ensures the production of high-quality
audit results, which are imperative for stakeholders in making informed business decisions.
These findings align with studies by Gul et al. (2013) and Phan et al. (2020), which affirm the
positive impact of due professional care on audit quality. Consequently, they reinforce the
importance of maintaining due professional care standards to uphold the integrity and
reliability of audit outcomes.
Table 4 also shows that professional skepticism has a positive effect on audit quality.
The auditor's disposition, characterized by inquiry, critical analysis, vigilance, cautious trust,
275
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

and strong self-assurance, facilitates the adherence to audit standards during the audit
process. Particularly in analytical procedures, auditors must scrutinize trust levels and assess
fraud risks to uncover relevant audit evidence effectively. These practices contribute to
enhancing audit outcomes by addressing prevalent audit risks and aligning with established
audit standards, thereby elevating audit quality. Professional skepticism warrants examination
in line with auditing standards, offering empirical insights into its influence on audit
performance, as emphasized by Eutsler (2018). These findings are consistent with studies
conducted by Albawwat et al. (2021), Zarefar et al. (2016), and Ying and Patel (2016)
Finally, the results from Table 5 and Figure 2 reveal an intriguing pattern where the
indirect effects of accountability and due professional care on audit quality, mediated by
professional skepticism, outweigh their direct effects. This indicates that while accountability
and due professional care have significant direct impacts on audit quality, their effects are
further amplified when mediated by professional skepticism. This logical pattern suggests
that professional skepticism plays a crucial role in enhancing the relationship between
auditors' sense of accountability, commitment to due professional care, and the overall
quality of audits. It implies that auditors who exhibit higher levels of professional skepticism
are better equipped to translate their sense of accountability and adherence to professional
standards into tangible improvements in audit quality. Therefore, professional skepticism
serves as a critical mediator, augmenting the effectiveness of accountability and due
professional care in ensuring high-quality audit outcomes.

Conclusion and Suggestion

In conclusion, the study findings underscore the importance of accountability, due

professional care, and professional skepticism in influencing audit quality positively.
Auditors demonstrating higher levels of accountability tend to exhibit increased skepticism
during the audit process, fostering a more vigilant and critical mindset. This enhanced
skepticism, in turn, contributes to improved audit quality by enabling auditors to detect and
address discrepancies effectively. Similarly, due professional care correlates positively with
both professional skepticism and audit quality, as auditors exhibiting meticulous behavior
enhance their skepticism and produce higher-quality audit outcomes. Furthermore,
professional skepticism emerges as a significant predictor of audit quality, as auditors'
inquiry, critical analysis, and vigilant attitude facilitate adherence to audit standards and
enhance the quality of audit outcomes. In addition, the results also highlight the mediating
role of professional skepticism, emphasizing its crucial contribution to the relationship of

276
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

accountability and due professional care on audit quality. Specifically, while accountability
and due professional care have direct positive effects on audit quality, their impacts are
further amplified when mediated by professional skepticism. This underscores the
significance of professional skepticism in enhancing the effectiveness of auditors' sense of
accountability and commitment to due professional care in ensuring high-quality audit
outcomes. Therefore, professional skepticism serves as a critical mediator, augmenting the
link between auditors' accountability, due professional care, and the overall quality of audits.
Given these findings, future studies could delve into understanding how professional
skepticism precisely mediates the connection between auditors' accountability, due
professional care, and audit quality. This could involve exploring the factors that impact
auditors' levels of professional skepticism and finding ways to boost professional skepticism
in audit practice. Long-term research tracking the effects of interventions aimed at enhancing
professional skepticism on audit quality could also provide valuable insights into their lasting
effectiveness. Moreover, investigating the potential moderating effects of contextual factors,
such as organizational culture and audit firm size, on the relationship between professional
skepticism and audit quality could offer a more nuanced understanding of their interaction.
Additionally, exploring the role of technological advancements, such as data analytics and
artificial intelligence, in influencing professional skepticism and its impact on audit quality
could be a promising avenue for future research.

References

Albawwat, I. E., Al-Hajaia, M. E., & Al Frijat, Y. S. (2021). The Relationship Between
Internal Auditors' Personality Traits, Internal Audit Effectiveness, and Financial
Reporting Quality: Empirical Evidence from Jordan. The Journal of Asian Finance,
Economics and Business, 8(4), 797-808.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no4.0797

Arenz, A. A., Elder, R. J., & Beasley, M. S. (2017). Auditing and Assurance Services, 16th
edition. London: Pearson.

Aronmwan, E., Ashafoke, T., & Mgbame, C. (2013). Audit firm reputation and audit quality.
Aronmwan, EJ, Ashafoke, TO, & Mgbame, CO (2013). Audit firm reputation and audit
quality. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(7), 66-75.

Barzideh, F., & Kheirollahi, M. (2012). Accountability, time pressure and suppression of
audit evidence. Journal of Audit Science, 11(45), 4-27.

277
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Cohen, J. R., Dalton, D. W., & Harp, N. L. (2017). Neutral and presumptive doubt
perspectives of professional skepticism and auditor job outcomes. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 62, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2017.08.003

Collemi, S. (2016, September 16). The Decline in Global Audit Quality. Accounting Today
News. http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/audit-accounting/the-decline-in-global-
audit-quality-79118-1.html.

Defond, M. L., Zhang, F., & Zhang, J. (2021). Auditing research using Chinese data: what’s
next? Accounting and Business Research, 51(6-7), 622-635.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2020.1746626

Dermarkar, S., & Hazgui, M. (2022). How auditors legitimize commercialism: A micro-
discursive analysis. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 83, 102228.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2020.102228

Endrawes, M., Leong, S., & Matawie, K. M. (2023). The moderating effect of culture on the
relationship between accountability and professional skepticism. Meditari Accountancy
Research, 31(2), 381-399. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2020-0986

Eutsler, J., Norris, A. E., & Trompeter, G. M. (2018). A live simulation-based investigation:
Interactions with clients and their effect on audit judgment and professional skepticism.
Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 37(3), 145-162. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-
51880

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.

Furiady, O., & Kurnia, R. (2015). The effect of work experiences, competency, motivation,
accountability and objectivity towards audit quality. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 211, 328-335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.042

Glover, S. M., & Prawitt, D. F. (2014). Enhancing auditor professional skepticism: The
professional skepticism continuum. Current Issues in Auditing, 8(2), P1-P10.
https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia-50895

Gordon, L. M., & Graham, S. (2006). "Attribution theory". The Encyclopedia of Human
Development. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. pp. 142–144. ISBN 978-1-
4129-0475-9.

278
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

Griffith, E. E., Hammersley, J. S., & Kadous, K. (2012). Auditing complex estimates:
Understanding the process used and problems encountered. Auditing: A Journal of
Practice & Theory, 31(2), 73–111. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1857175.

Gul, F. A., Wu, D., & Yang, Z. (2013). Do individual auditors affect audit quality? Evidence
from archival data. The Accounting Review, 88(6), 1993-2023.
https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-50536

Holm, C., & Zaman, M. (2012). Regulating audit quality: Restoring trust and legitimacy.
Accounting Forum, 36(1), 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2011.11.004

Hoos, F., Pruijssers, J. L., & Lander, M. W. (2019). Who’s watching? Accountability in
different audit regimes and the effects on auditors’ professional skepticism. Journal of
Business Ethics, 156, 563-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3603-6

Hurley, P. J., Mayhew, B. W., & Obermire, K. M. (2019). Realigning auditors'

accountability: Experimental evidence. The Accounting Review, 94(3), 233-250.
https://doi.org/10.2308/accr-52224

Hurtt, R. K. (2010). Development of a scale to measure professional skepticism. Auditing: A

Journal of Practice & Theory, 29(1), 149-171. https://doi.org/10.2308/aud.2010.29.1.149

Hurtt, R. K., Brown-Liburd, H., Earley, C. E., & Krishnamoorthy, G. (2013). Research on
auditor professional skepticism: Literature synthesis and opportunities for future
research. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 32(Supplement 1), 45-97.
https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-50361

Hutabarat, E. C., Arifin, T., & Abrar, A. (2022). How does audit committee moderate the
relationship between audit firm size, industry specialization, and the cost of equity
capital? A comparison of the Ohlson and Capital Asset Pricing Model. JEMA: Jurnal
Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 19(1), 97-117.
https://doi.org/10.31106/jema.v19i1.17985

Kamil, N. I. (2015). The Effect of Taxpayer Awareness, Knowledge, Tax Penalties and Tax
Authorities Services on the Tax Complience:(Survey on the Individual Taxpayer at
Jabodetabek & Bandung). Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 6(2), 104-111.

Kim, S., Trotman, K. T., & Fargher, N. (2015). The comparative effect of process and
outcome accountability in enhancing professional skepticism. Accounting & Finance,
55(4), 1015–1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/ acfi.12084

279
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Krishna, K., & Nadya, F. (2020). The Effect of Independence, Integrity, Professionalism, and
Professional Skepticism on the Accuracy of Giving Audit Opinion (The Case of Audit
Board of the Republic of Indonesia). Advances in Economics, Business and Management
Research, 127, 5-10. http://repository.stei.ac.id/631/

Kusumawati, A., & Syamsuddin, S. (2018). The effect of auditor quality to professional
skepticsm and its relationship to audit quality. International Journal of Law and
Management, 60(4), 998-1008.

Kythreotis, A., & Soltani, M. (2023). Relevance and faithful representation (reliability) of
annual and semi-annual financial statements; a trade-off? International Journal of
Managerial and Financial Accounting, 15(3), 393-412.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMFA.2023.131779

La Torre, M., Botes, V. L., Dumay, J., & Odendaal, E. (2021). Protecting a new Achilles
heel: the role of auditors within the practice of data protection. Managerial Auditing
Journal, 36(2), 218-239. https://doi.org/10.1108/MAJ-03-2018-1836

Lamba, R. A., Yohanes, C. S., Lamba, A., & Pattiasina, V. (2020). The effect of auditor
independence and ethics on auditor professional skepticism: Its implications for audit
quality in Indonesia. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(8),
383-396.

Louwers, Timothy J., Elaine Henry, Brad J, Reed, & Elizabeth, A, Gordon. (2008).
Deficiencies in Auditing Related-Party Transaction: Insights from AAERs. Current
Issues in Auditing. 2(2), 10-16. https://doi.org/10.2308/ciia.2008.2.2.A10

Low, K. Y., & Tan, H. T. (2011). Does time constraint lead to poorer audit performance?
Effects of forewarning of impending time constraints and instructions. Auditing: A
Journal of Practice & Theory, 30(4), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.2308/ajpt-10180

Macnish, K., & Van der Ham, J. (2020). Ethics in cybersecurity research and practice.
Technology in society, 63, 101382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101382

Mansur, T. (2007). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Kualitas Audit Ditinjau dari Persepsi
Auditor atas Pelatihan dan Keahlian, Independensi dan Penggunaan Kemahiran
Profesional [Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Gadjah Mada].
https://etd.repository.ugm.ac.id/penelitian/detail/36806

280
 Public accountant professional skepticism behavior in improving audit quality: A path analysis
by M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, Agung Mulyo Widodo

Nasution, D., & Östermark, R. (2020). The impact of auditors’ awareness of the profession’s
reputation for independence on auditors' ethical judgment. Social Responsibility Journal,
16(8), 1087-1105. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-05-2018-0117

Oussedik, E., Cline, A., Su, J. J., Masicampo, E. J., Kammrath, L. K., Ip, E., & Feldman, S.
R. (2019). Accountability in patient adherence. Patient preference and adherence, 13,
1511-1517. https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S213113

Pflugrath, G., Martinov‐Bennie, N., & Chen, L. (2007). The impact of codes of ethics and
experience on auditor judgments. Managerial Auditing Journal, 22(6), 566-589.
https://doi.org/10.1108/02686900710759389

Phan, T. H., Le, D. T., Le, N. D. Q., Nguyen, T. T. (2020). Research on factors affecting
professional skepticism and audit quality: Experiment in Vietnam. International Journal
of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(1), 830–847.

Persellin, J. S., Schmidt, J. J., Vandervelde, S. D., & Wilkins, M. S. (2019). Auditor
perceptions of audit workloads, audit quality, and job satisfaction. Accounting Horizons,
33(4), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.2308/acch-52488

Samuji, S. A. B. M., Othman, R. D. B., & Ismail, Z. (2022). Factors affecting tax compliance
among cooperatives taxpayers in Malaysia. International Journal of Accounting, 7(41),
9-17.

Sorensen, K., & Ortegren, M. (2021). The next best thing: Social presence and
accountability’s impact on auditor professional skepticism. Journal of Corporate
Accounting & Finance, 32(2), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcaf.22484

Ta, T. T., Doan, T. N., Pham, D. C., & Tran, H. N. (2022). Factors affecting the professional
skepticism of independent auditors in Viet Nam. Cogent Business & Management, 9(1),
2059043. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2059043

Tandiontong, M. (2016). Audit quality and its measurement. Jakarta: Alfabeta.

Utari, W., Iswoyo, A., Chamariyah, W., Mardiana, F., Rusdiyanto, & Hidayat, W. (2021).
Effect Of Work Training, Competency and Job Satisfaction on Employee Productivity: A
Case Study Indonesia. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(4),
696–711. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.8006783

281
JEMA: Jurnal Ilmiah Bidang Akuntansi dan Manajemen, 20(2) 2023, 264-282
http://dx.doi.org/10.31106/jema.v20i2.20616, ISSN (Online) 2597-4017

Wahidahwati, W., & Asyik, N. F. (2022). Determinants of auditors ability in fraud detection.
Cogent Business & Management, 9(1), 2130165.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2130165

Werner, M., Wiese, M., & Maas, A. (2021). Embedding process mining into financial
statement audits. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 41, 100514.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2021.100514

Ying, S. X., & Patel, C. (2016). Skeptical judgments and self-construal: A comparative study
between Chinese accounting students in Australia and China. Journal of International
Accounting Research, 15(3), 97-111. https://doi.org/10.2308/jiar-51491

Zarefar, A., & Zarefar, A. (2016). The Influence of Ethics, experience and competency
toward the quality of auditing with professional auditor scepticism as a Moderating
Variable. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 219, 828-832.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.074

Zahmatkesh, S., & Rezazadeh, J. (2017). The effect of auditor features on audit quality.
Tékhne, 15(2), 79-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tekhne.2017.09.003

About the Authors

M.F. Arrozi Adhikara, a figure in the field of accounting, earned a Doctorate in Accounting
from Esa Unggul University, Jakarta, Indonesia. His recent research focuses on investigating
the role of sustainability performance, green competitive advantage, information systems
usage behavior, and the implementation of performance measurement systems in hospitals.
As the lead author of the study, he established the ideas, objectives, research framework,
hypotheses, and aligned them with the overarching framework.

Agung Mulyo Widodo, a distinguished doctoral graduate from Asia University, Taiwan. His
illustrious career has seen him collaborate on groundbreaking projects with industry giants
such as Caltex Pacific Indonesia, Siemens Telecommunications, and Nokia Siemens
Networks (NSN). With an insatiable thirst for knowledge, his current research pursuits span
the cutting-edge realms of Artificial Intelligence, Data Science, Information Security, and
Wireless Communication Technologies. He contributed to this study by conducting data
analysis using Path analysis techniques, and helped with the writing and editing of this paper.

282