{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02323991797676008, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002050580997949419, 'mean_word_length': 5.506666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Getting from Skeptical Judgment to Skeptical Action: A Field Study of Auditor Behavior

Professional skepticism is clearly an important and timely topic in the practice and regulation of auditing. In this paper, we apply Bandura’s self-efficacy construct within Social Cognitive Theory to auditor efficacy and skeptical action in an audit context. This study uses a multiple-interview design to explore the exercise of professional skepticism by experienced auditors. An auditor can be skeptical about the facts and circumstances of a client but may not always manifest that skeptical judgment as skeptical action. We adopt a social constructivist approach applied through a self-efficacy model for auditing to better understand auditors’ experience when considering skeptical action. Our evidence suggests that efficacy expectations associated with skeptical actions are increased by the presence of three primary factors: (1) the support/collectivism within the audit team (consensus), (2) the preparation/homework of the auditor (cognizance), and (3) the quality of the relationship with the client counterpart (consonance). These three themes are further illustrated by specific actions that can be taken by an auditor. The study contributes to our understanding of how auditors make decisions that influence skeptical actions during the course of the audit, the resources and strategies employed to do so, and the motivations that underlie skeptical actions.