IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ijoais/v13y2012i3p248-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The antecedents of the use of continuous auditing in the internal auditing context

Author

Listed:
  • Gonzalez, George C.
  • Sharma, Pratyush N.
  • Galletta, Dennis F.

Abstract

The concept of continuous auditing originated over two decades ago. Yet despite its much touted benefits, its acceptance and use in practice has been slow. To gain insight into the state of affairs, we surveyed 210 internal auditors worldwide on the status of their use of continuous auditing. Using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) we explore the antecedents of internal auditors' intentions to use continuous auditing technology. Employing the Partial Least Squares method, we find strong support for the model with an R2 of 44.3%. Specifically, we find that internal auditors' perceptions of effort expectancy and social influence are significant predictors of their intentions to use continuous auditing. We also find that annual sales volume of the company and voluntariness of use significantly moderate the relationship between performance expectancy and social influence respectively. Additionally, we find regional differences in the significance of key UTAUT antecedents. Specifically, we find that the North American internal auditors are more likely to use continuous auditing due to soft social coercion pressures of Social Influence through peers and higher authorities. On the other hand, Middle Eastern auditors are more likely to use the technology if it is mandated by the higher authorities.

Suggested Citation

  • Gonzalez, George C. & Sharma, Pratyush N. & Galletta, Dennis F., 2012. "The antecedents of the use of continuous auditing in the internal auditing context," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 248-262.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ijoais:v:13:y:2012:i:3:p:248-262
    DOI: 10.1016/j.accinf.2012.06.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467089512000401
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.accinf.2012.06.009?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deborah R. Compeau & Christopher A. Higgins, 1995. "Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 118-143, June.
    2. Claes Cassel & Peter Hackl & Anders Westlund, 1999. "Robustness of partial least-squares method for estimating latent variable quality structures," Journal of Applied Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 435-446.
    3. Hunton, James E. & Mauldin, Elaine & Wheeler, Patrick, 2010. "RETRACTED: Continuous monitoring and the status quo effect," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 239-252.
    4. Inkpen, Andrew C. & Birkenshaw, Julian, 1994. "International joint ventures and performance: an interorganizational perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 201-217, September.
    5. Gerardine DeSanctis & Marshall Scott Poole, 1994. "Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 121-147, May.
    6. Curtis, Mary B. & Payne, Elizabeth A., 2008. "An examination of contextual factors and individual characteristics affecting technology implementation decisions in auditing," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 104-121.
    7. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    8. Robin L. Wakefield & Dorothy E. Leidner & Gary Garrison, 2008. "Research Note ---A Model of Conflict, Leadership, and Performance in Virtual Teams," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 434-455, December.
    9. Chan, David Y. & Vasarhelyi, Miklos A., 2011. "Innovation and practice of continuous auditing," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 152-160.
    10. Julian Birkinshaw & Allen Morrison & John Hulland, 1995. "Structural and competitive determinants of a global integration strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(8), pages 637-655.
    11. Greenfield, Geoffrey & Rohde, Fiona, 2009. "Technology acceptance: Not all organisations or workers may be the same," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 263-272.
    12. Kim, Hyo-Jeong & Mannino, Michael & Nieschwietz, Robert J., 2009. "Information technology acceptance in the internal audit profession: Impact of technology features and complexity," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 214-228.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rikhardsson, Pall & Dull, Richard, 2016. "An exploratory study of the adoption, application and impacts of continuous auditing technologies in small businesses," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 26-37.
    2. Rakipi, Romina & De Santis, Federica & D'Onza, Giuseppe, 2021. "Correlates of the internal audit function’s use of data analytics in the big data era: Global evidence," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    3. Mălăescu, Irina & Sutton, Steve G., 2015. "The effects of decision aid structural restrictiveness on cognitive load, perceived usefulness, and reuse intentions," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 16-36.
    4. Shui-Lien Chen & June-Hong Chen & Yung Hsin Lee, 2018. "A Comparison of Competing Models for Understanding Industrial Organization’s Acceptance of Cloud Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Abdalwali Lutfi & Hamza Alqudah, 2023. "The Influence of Technological Factors on the Computer-Assisted Audit Tools and Techniques Usage during COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, May.
    6. Ahmad Almagrashi & Abdulwahab Mujalli & Tehmina Khan & Osama Attia, 2023. "Factors determining internal auditors’ behavioral intention to use computer-assisted auditing techniques: an extension of the UTAUT model and an empirical study," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fábio Albuquerque & Paula Gomes Dos Santos, 2023. "Recent Trends in Accounting and Information System Research: A Literature Review Using Textual Analysis Tools," FinTech, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-27, April.
    2. Fatima Zahra Barrane & Gahima Egide Karuranga & Diane Poulin, 2018. "Technology Adoption and Diffusion: A New Application of the UTAUT Model," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(06), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Sojung Lucia Kim & Thompson S.H. Teo & Anol Bhattacherjee & Kichan Nam, 0. "IS auditor characteristics, audit process variables, and IS audit satisfaction: An empirical study in South Korea," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-15.
    4. Ahmad Almagrashi & Abdulwahab Mujalli & Tehmina Khan & Osama Attia, 2023. "Factors determining internal auditors’ behavioral intention to use computer-assisted auditing techniques: an extension of the UTAUT model and an empirical study," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, December.
    5. Sojung Lucia Kim & Thompson S.H. Teo & Anol Bhattacherjee & Kichan Nam, 2017. "IS auditor characteristics, audit process variables, and IS audit satisfaction: An empirical study in South Korea," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 577-591, June.
    6. Afsay, Akram & Tahriri, Arash & Rezaee, Zabihollah, 2023. "A meta-analysis of factors affecting acceptance of information technology in auditing," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    7. Abdalwali Lutfi & Hamza Alqudah, 2023. "The Influence of Technological Factors on the Computer-Assisted Audit Tools and Techniques Usage during COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, May.
    8. Weiling Ke & Lele Kang & Chuan-Hoo Tan & Chih-Hung Peng, 2021. "User Competence with Enterprise Systems: The Effects of Work Environment Factors," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 860-875, September.
    9. Bierstaker, James & Janvrin, Diane & Lowe, D. Jordan, 2014. "What factors influence auditors' use of computer-assisted audit techniques?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-74.
    10. Ivonne Angelica Castiblanco Jimenez & Laura Cristina Cepeda García & Maria Grazia Violante & Federica Marcolin & Enrico Vezzetti, 2020. "Commonly Used External TAM Variables in e-Learning, Agriculture and Virtual Reality Applications," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    11. Siew, Eu-Gene & Rosli, Khairina & Yeow, Paul H.P., 2020. "Organizational and environmental influences in the adoption of computer-assisted audit tools and techniques (CAATTs) by audit firms in Malaysia," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    12. Kuttimani Tamilmani & Nripendra P. Rana & Robin Nunkoo & Vishnupriya Raghavan & Yogesh K. Dwivedi, 2022. "Indian Travellers’ Adoption of Airbnb Platform," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 77-96, February.
    13. Nripendra P. Rana & Yogesh K. Dwivedi & Banita Lal & Michael D. Williams & Marc Clement, 2017. "Citizens’ adoption of an electronic government system: towards a unified view," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 549-568, June.
    14. Park, Jieun & Kim, Junghwan & Nam, Changi & Kim, Seongcheol, 2013. "Driver's intention to use smartphone-car connectivity," 24th European Regional ITS Conference, Florence 2013 88467, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    15. Mălăescu, Irina & Sutton, Steve G., 2015. "The effects of decision aid structural restrictiveness on cognitive load, perceived usefulness, and reuse intentions," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 16-36.
    16. Emilios Galariotis & Christophe Germain & Constantin Zopounidis, 2018. "A combined methodology for the concurrent evaluation of the business, financial and sports performance of football clubs: the case of France," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 266(1), pages 589-612, July.
    17. Lionel P. Robert Jr. & Tracy Ann Sykes, 2017. "Extending the Concept of Control Beliefs: Integrating the Role of Advice Networks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 84-96, March.
    18. Darshna V. Banker & Shamita Garg & Mohita Maggon, 2023. "Virtual Leadership: Bibliometrics, Framework-Based Systematic Review, and Future Agenda," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 12(3), pages 300-332, December.
    19. Ning Nan & Robert Zmud & Emre Yetgin, 2014. "A complex adaptive systems perspective of innovation diffusion: an integrated theory and validated virtual laboratory," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 52-88, March.
    20. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13000 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Do Giang Nguyen & Minh-Tri Ha, 2022. "What Makes Users Continue to Want to Use the Digital Platform? Evidence From the Ride-Hailing Service Platform in Vietnam," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(1), pages 21582440211, January.

    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:eee:ijoais:v:13:y:2012:i:3:p:248-262. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-accounting-information-systems/ .

    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.