IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v33y2016i1p261-287.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Influence of Mood on Subordinates’ Ability to Resist Coercive Pressure in Public Accounting

Author

Listed:
  • Eric N. Johnson
  • D. Jordan Lowe
  • Philip M. J. Reckers

Abstract

This study reports on an experiment conducted to assess the influence of different affective mood states on auditors’ ability to resist obedience pressure to commit or overlook unethical acts in six audit contexts. Obedience pressure from superiors to comply with unethical directives is of particular concern in public accounting, given the hierarchical structure of audit teams and the power imbalance in superior–subordinate relationships. One hundred and seventy audit seniors from two large international public accounting firms participated in an experiment. Three different moods were induced in participants through work†related trigger events: one positive active mood state (arousal) and two negative passive mood states (fear and insignificance). These mood states were anticipated to influence auditors’ expressed willingness to comply with their superiors’ unethical directives as set forth in our ethical scenarios. Our results indicate that low levels of arousal and high levels of fear and insignificance influenced compliance intentions. Our results also indicate overall high levels of expressed willingness to comply with superiors’ unethical directives. Implications of our findings for understanding the antecedents of unethical conduct within the accounting profession and for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric N. Johnson & D. Jordan Lowe & Philip M. J. Reckers, 2016. "The Influence of Mood on Subordinates’ Ability to Resist Coercive Pressure in Public Accounting," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 261-287, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:33:y:2016:i:1:p:261-287
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12141
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12141?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Laurence Daoust & Bertrand Malsch, 2020. "When the Client Is A Former Auditor: Auditees' Expert Knowledge and Social Capital as Threats to Staff Auditors' Operational Independence†," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(3), pages 1333-1369, September.
    2. Carolyn Mactavish & Susan McCracken & Regan N. Schmidt, 2018. "External Auditors' Judgment and Decision Making: An Audit Process Task Analysis," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(3), pages 387-426, September.
    3. Wenjun Wu & Dengke Yu, 2023. "The role of individual perceptions in the completion of formalistic tasks," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Eric N. Johnson & Linda A. Kidwell & D. Jordan Lowe & Philip M. J. Reckers, 2019. "Who Follows the Unethical Leader? The Association Between Followers’ Personal Characteristics and Intentions to Comply in Committing Organizational Fraud," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 181-193, January.
    5. Deqiang Deng & Chenchen Ye & Fan Wu & Yijing Guo & Hao Li & Changsheng Wang, 2023. "Effect of organizational ethical self-interest climate on unethical accounting behaviour with two different motivations in China: the moderating effect of Confucian ShiZhong Thinking," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Austin, Chelsea Rae & Bobek, Donna D. & Jackson, Scott, 2021. "Does prospect theory explain ethical decision making? Evidence from tax compliance," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:33:y:2016:i:1:p:261-287. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.