IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v18y2025i3p115-d1597926.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing Auditor Judgment Quality: A Review of Evidence from Experimental Research

Author

Listed:
  • Renny Friska

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia)

  • Dian Agustia

    (Department of Accounting, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Airlangga, Surabaya 60115, Indonesia)

Abstract

We review 30 experimental auditing research papers published in four leading accounting and auditing journals from 2001 to 2023 to address three key issues. First, we identify trends in experimental auditing research and find that most studies are published in Behavioral Research in Accounting due to its focus on behavioral and psychological aspects of auditing. Second, to enhance the audit quality, we map this research to the task–person and interpersonal interaction framework. The findings indicate that most studies focus on audit task complexity, individual auditor attributes, and their interactions with stakeholders, addressing factors that influence auditor judgment quality. Third, by analyzing the characteristics of experimental studies, we highlight the evolution in the topics explored and participant types over the past two decades. These insights provide valuable guidance for future research and practical implications for improved audit judgment and decision-making processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Renny Friska & Dian Agustia, 2025. "Enhancing Auditor Judgment Quality: A Review of Evidence from Experimental Research," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-18, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:3:p:115-:d:1597926
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/3/115/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/3/115/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pei-Gi Shu & Tsung-Kang Chen & Wen-Jye Hung & Tsui-Lin Chiang, 2013. "Economic Dependence and Reputation Concern for the Audit Firm, Audit Groups, and Individual Auditors — The Case of Taiwan," Review of Pacific Basin Financial Markets and Policies (RPBFMP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 1-28.
    2. William D. Brink & Jonathan H. Grenier & Jonathan S. Pyzoha & Andrew Reffett, 2019. "The Effects of Clawbacks on Auditors’ Propensity to Propose Restatements and Risk Assessments," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 313-332, August.
    3. Brian E. Roe & David R. Just, 2009. "Internal and External Validity in Economics Research: Tradeoffs between Experiments, Field Experiments, Natural Experiments, and Field Data," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1266-1271.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    2. Hermann, Daniel & Musshoff, Oliver & Agethen, Katrin, 2014. "I will never switch sides: an experimental approach to determine drivers for investment decisions of conventional and organic hog farmers," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183084, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Kee, Jennifer Y. & Segovia, Michelle S. & Palma, Marco A., 2023. "Slim or Plus-Size Burrito? A natural experiment of consumers’ restaurant choice," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Grüner Sven, 2020. "Sample Size Calculation in Economic Experiments," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 240(6), pages 791-823, December.
    5. Norbert Hirschauer & Oliver Mußhoff, 2012. "Smarte Regulierung in der Ernährungswirtschaft durch Name-and-Shame," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 81(4), pages 163-182.
    6. Matteo M. Galizzi & Daniel Navarro-Martinez, 2019. "On the External Validity of Social Preference Games: A Systematic Lab-Field Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 976-1002, March.
    7. Jörg Peters & Jörg Langbein & Gareth Roberts, 2018. "Generalization in the Tropics – Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 34-64.
    8. Bennett, Davara L. & Webb, Calum J.R. & Mason, Kate E. & Schlüter, Daniela K. & Fahy, Katie & Alexiou, Alexandros & Wickham, Sophie & Barr, Ben & Taylor-Robinson, David, 2021. "Funding for preventative Children’s Services and rates of children becoming looked after: A natural experiment using longitudinal area-level data in England," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    9. Marie Ferré & Stefanie Engel & Elisabeth Gsottbauer, 2023. "External validity of economic experiments on Agri‐environmental scheme design," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 661-685, September.
    10. Chambers, Paul E. & Glenn Dutcher, E. & Mark Isaac, R., 2018. "Improving Environmental Quality Through Aid: An Experimental Analysis of Aid Structures With Heterogeneous Agents," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 435-446.
    11. Ning Xu & Jian Hong & Timothy C. G. Fisher, 2016. "Generalization error minimization: a new approach to model evaluation and selection with an application to penalized regression," Papers 1610.05448, arXiv.org.
    12. Maurizio Canavari & Andreas C. Drichoutis & Jayson L. Lusk & Rodolfo M. Nayga, Jr., 2018. "How to run an experimental auction: A review of recent advances," Working Papers 2018-5, Agricultural University of Athens, Department Of Agricultural Economics.
    13. Mußhoff, O. & Hirschauer, N., 2013. "Planspiele als experimentelle Methode der Politikfolgenabschätzung: Das Beispiel der Stickstoffextensivierung," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 48, March.
    14. Elisabeth Vollmer & Daniel Hermann & Oliver Musshoff, 2019. "The disposition effect in farmers’ selling behavior: an experimental investigation," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 177-189, March.
    15. Daniel Gregg & John Rolfe, 2018. "Myopia and saliency in renewable resource management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 62(3), pages 394-419, July.
    16. Brendan Bo O’Connor & Karen Lee & Dylan Campbell & Liane Young, 2022. "Moral psychology from the lab to the wild: Relief registries as a paradigm for studying real-world altruism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Siebert, Johannes Ulrich & Kunz, Reinhard E. & Rolf, Philipp, 2021. "Effects of decision training on individuals’ decision-making proactivity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 294(1), pages 264-282.
    18. Pavel Ciaian & Federica Di Marcantonio & Liesbeth Colen & Kjersti Nes & Jesus Barreiro-Hurle & François J. Dessart & Luisa Menapace & Carlo Russo & Annarita Colamatteo & Negin Fathinejad & Maria Anna , 2020. "Economic analyses of differences in composition of seemingly identical branded food products in the Single Market," JRC Research Reports JRC120297, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Sean F. Ellis & Olesya M. Savchenko & Kent D. Messer, 2023. "Is a non-representative convenience sample of adults good enough? Insights from an economic experiment," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 293-307, December.
    20. Marette Stéphan & Roosen Jutta & Blanchemanche Sandrine, 2011. "The Combination of Lab and Field Experiments for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 2(3), pages 1-36, August.

    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:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:3:p:115-:d:1597926. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.