search query: @indexterm LITIGATION / total: 152
reference: 1 / 152
« previous | next »
| Author: | Guiral, A. (et al.) |
| Title: | Ethical dilemmas in auditing: Dishonesty or unintentional bias? |
| Journal: | Journal of Business Ethics
2010 : FEB, VOL. 91:SUPPL. 1, p. 151-166 |
| Index terms: | accounting auditing ethics litigation risk regulations theories models |
| Language: | eng |
| Abstract: | Auditors are suggested to be morally compromised by the perceived consequences of their opinions in Moral Seduction Theory. The root of the auditing problem seems to result in an unintentional bias (here as: unint-bias) rather than in dishonesty. The new regulation, Sarbanes-Oxley Act, is a consequence of an incorrect understanding of the main true source of auditor's biases. Herein, a cognitive approach is developed by connecting the Throughput Model (TM) to the Moral Seduction Theory which allows a better understanding of how conflicts of interest lead auditors to avoid the issuance of warning signals to stakeholders. This paper's model is tested by performing a hypothetical scenario with 80 experienced auditors from international accounting firms. The results confirm auditors' unintentional reluctance to issue qualified audit opinions alerting investors due to their fear of precipitating clients' final bankruptcy. It is implied that, more than a regulation, effort should be made in monitoring those conflicts of interest to reduce unint-bias. |
« previous | next »
SCIMA