IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oap/ijaefa/v14y2022i2p162-169id693.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Moral Reasoning Moderate Audit Quality Determinants?

Author

Listed:
  • Ceacilia SRIMINDARTI
  • Siti Nur Fajriah ASHOBAH
  • Pancawati HARDININGSIH
  • Askar YUNIANTO

Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyse whether moral reasoning moderates the determinants of audit quality and examine the effects of competence, time budget pressure and moral reasoning on audit quality. The participants in this study were auditors of the Audit Board of Indonesia in Central Java. Using purposive sampling, 97 participants made up the entire studies. Data was analysed using partial least square (PLS). This study found that competence had a significant positive impact on audit quality. Time budget pressure had a negative impact on audit quality. Though, moral reasoning had no impact on audit quality. Furthermore, moral reasoning enhanced the impact of competence on audit quality. On the other hand, moral reasoning weakened the effect of time budget pressure on audit quality. The findings of this study are anticipated to advance the field of auditing science and offer guidance to Indonesia‘s Audit Board in order to assist its auditors in maintaining the calibre of their audit.

Suggested Citation

  • Ceacilia SRIMINDARTI & Siti Nur Fajriah ASHOBAH & Pancawati HARDININGSIH & Askar YUNIANTO, 2022. "Does Moral Reasoning Moderate Audit Quality Determinants?," International Journal of Applied Economics, Finance and Accounting, Online Academic Press, vol. 14(2), pages 162-169.
    • Handle: RePEc:oap:ijaefa:v:14:y:2022:i:2:p:162-169:id:693
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://onlineacademicpress.com/index.php/IJAEFA/article/view/693/691
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://onlineacademicpress.com/index.php/IJAEFA/article/view/693/698
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:oap:ijaefa:v:14:y:2022:i:2:p:162-169:id:693. 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: Heather Rothman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlineacademicpress.com/index.php/IJAEFA/ .

    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.