IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v12y2017i12p168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relationship between Network Security Policies and Audit Evidence Documentation: The Accounting Information Security Culture as a Mediator

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammad Naser Musa Hamdan

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between network security policies (the department policy, system director policy, user policy, information security officer policy) on the one hand, and audit evidence documenting on the other hand. As the security, culture of accounting information has been introduced as a variable mediating that relationship. The researcher sent (450) questionnaires to all the companies listed on the Amman Stock Exchange in Jordan equivalent to (228) company until 2015. The study found that there is a significant relationship between networks (the department policy, system director policy, user policy, information security officer policy) and documentation of the audit evidence. While the respondents said that, there is not a significant relationship between information security officer and policy and documentation of the audit evidence. Besides, the value of the correlation coefficient between network security policies and documentation of audit evidence had increased from (0.56) to (0.62), after entering the variable of security culture of accounting information systems to demonstrate its impact as a variable rate of the regression model and this result demonstrates the importance of awareness of security culture of the companies. These results will be very useful for those are interested, especially auditors to help them to appreciate the importance of documenting the audit evidence of network security and their implementation on the ground.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammad Naser Musa Hamdan, 2017. "The Relationship between Network Security Policies and Audit Evidence Documentation: The Accounting Information Security Culture as a Mediator," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(12), pages 168-168, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:12:y:2017:i:12:p:168
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/71196/39341
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/71196
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Faris Soud Alqadi, 2017. "The Role of Internal Auditing in Controlling the Performance for Jordanian Industrial Companies: Empirical Evidence," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 186-186, August.
    2. Tan, Ht, 1995. "Effects Of Expectations, Prior Involvement, And Review Awareness On Memory For Audit Evidence And Judgment," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 113-135.
    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. Christensen, Brant E. & Newton, Nathan J. & Wilkins, Michael S., 2021. "How do team workloads and team staffing affect the audit? Archival evidence from U.S. audits," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Bandyopadhyay, Sati P. & Chen, Changling & Yu, Yingmin, 2014. "Mandatory audit partner rotation, audit market concentration, and audit quality: Evidence from China," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 18-31.
    3. Koch, Christopher & Weber, Martin & Wüstemann, Jens, 2007. "Can auditors be independent? : Experimental evidence," Papers 07-59, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    4. Salterio, Steven, 1996. "The effects of precedents and client position on auditors' financial accounting policy judgment," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 467-486, July.
    5. Michal Bobek, 2018. "Nature of Audit and Demand for Audit [Podstata auditu a poptávka po auditu]," Český finanční a účetní časopis, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2018(1), pages 5-23.
    6. Mooweon Rhee & Pamela R. Haunschild, 2006. "The Liability of Good Reputation: A Study of Product Recalls in the U.S. Automobile Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 101-117, February.
    7. Jeffrey R. Cohen & Gregory M. Trompeter, 1998. "An Examination of Factors Affecting Audit Practice Development," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 481-504, December.
    8. Soon‐Yeow Phang, 2020. "Impacts of the timing of the discovery of a subsequent event on the auditors’ approach to subsequent events," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(4), pages 4121-4146, December.
    9. Olivier Boiral & Iñaki Heras-Saizarbitoria & Marie-Christine Brotherton & Julie Bernard, 2019. "Ethical Issues in the Assurance of Sustainability Reports: Perspectives from Assurance Providers," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 159(4), pages 1111-1125, November.
    10. Sweeney, John T. & Suh, Ik Seon & Dalton, Kenneth C. & Meljem, Sylvia, 2017. "Are workpaper reviews preparer-specific?," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 560-577.
    11. Andiola, Lindsay M. & Bedard, Jean C., 2018. "Delivering the “tough message”: Moderators of subordinate auditors’ reactions to feedback," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 52-68.
    12. Mayorga, Diane & Trotman, Ken T., 2016. "The effects of a reasonable investor perspective and firm's prior disclosure policy on managers' disclosure judgments," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 50-62.
    13. Yip-Ow, Jackson & Tan, Hun-Tong, 2000. "Effects of the preparer's justification on the reviewer's hypothesis generation and judgment in analytical procedures," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 203-215, February.
    14. Kathryn Kadous & Lisa M. Sedor, 2004. "The Efficacy of Third†Party Consultation in Preventing Managerial Escalation of Commitment: The Role of Mental Representations," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 55-82, March.
    15. Rich, J. S. & Solomon, I. & Trotman, K. T., 1997. "The audit review process: A characterization from the persuasion perspective," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 481-505, July.
    16. Neal Arthur & Medhat Endrawes & Shawn Ho, 2017. "Impact of Partner Change on Audit Quality: An Analysis of Partner and Firm Specialisation Effects," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 27(4), pages 368-381, December.
    17. Trotman, Ken T. & Bauer, Tim D. & Humphreys, Kerry A., 2015. "Group judgment and decision making in auditing: Past and future research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 56-72.
    18. Krista Fiolleau & Kris Hoang & Karim Jamal & Shyam Sunder, 2013. "How Do Regulatory Reforms to Enhance Auditor Independence Work in Practice?," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(3), pages 864-890, September.
    19. Lin, Hsiao-Lun & Yen, Ai-Ru, 2022. "Auditor rotation, key audit matter disclosures, and financial reporting quality," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    20. Michael Gibbins & Ken T. Trotman, 2002. "Audit Review: Managers' Interpersonal Expectations and Conduct of the Review," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 411-444, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    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:ibn:ijbmjn:v:12:y:2017:i:12:p:168. 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: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    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.